website/blog/systemd_insecurity.xhtml
inference 0a39225eea
Remove duplicate IDs
IDs should not be defined multiple times. Use the `<section>` elements
to define the IDs rather than the headings.
2024-01-29 21:41:25 +00:00

96 lines
5.1 KiB
HTML

<!DOCTYPE html>
<!-- Inferencium - Website - Blog - #1 -->
<!-- Version: 7.0.0-alpha.2 -->
<!-- Copyright 2022 Jake Winters -->
<!-- SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause -->
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"/>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="../main.css"/>
<title>Inferencium - Blog - systemd Insecurity</title>
</head>
<body>
<nav class="navbar">
<div><a href="../index.xhtml"><img src="../asset/img/logo-inferencium-no_text.png" width="110px" height="110px"/></a></div>
<div><a href="../index.xhtml" class="title">Inferencium</a></div>
<div><a href="../about.xhtml">About</a></div>
<div><a href="../documentation.xhtml">Documentation</a></div>
<div><a href="../source.xhtml">Source</a></div>
<div><a href="../changelog.xhtml">Changelog</a></div>
<div><a href="../blog.xhtml">Blog</a></div>
<div><a href="../contact.xhtml">Contact</a></div>
<div><a href="../directory.xhtml">Directory</a></div>
<div><a href="../key.xhtml">Key</a></div>
</nav>
<h1>Blog - #1</h1>
<h2>systemd Insecurity</h2>
<p class="update_date">Posted: 2022-01-29 (UTC+00:00)</p>
<p class="update_date">Updated: 2023-10-31 (UTC+00:00)</p>
<nav id="toc">
<h2><a href="#toc">Table of Contents</a></h2>
<ul>
<li><a href="#issue-0">Issue #0 - Against CVE Assignment</a></li>
<li><a href="#issue-1">Issue #1 - CVEs Are Not Useful</a></li>
<li><a href="#issue-2">Issue #2 - Security is a Circus</a></li>
<li><a href="#issue-3">Issue #3 - Blaming the User</a></li>
</ul>
</nav>
<p>Anyone who cares about security may want to switch from systemd as soon as possible; its lead
developer doesn't care about your security at all.</p>
<section id="issue-0">
<h2><a href="#issue-0">Issue #0 - Against CVE Assignment</a></h2>
<blockquote>"You don't assign CVEs to every single random bugfix we do, do
you?"</blockquote>
<p>- Lennart Poettering, systemd lead developer</p>
<p><b>My thoughts:</b> Yes, if they're security-related.</p>
<p>Source:
<a href="https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/5998#issuecomment-303782334">systemd GitHub Issue 5998</a></p>
</section>
<section id="issue-1">
<h2><a href="#issue-1">Issue #1 - CVEs Are Not Useful</a></h2>
<blockquote>"Humpf, I am not convinced this is the right way to announce this.
We never did that, and half the CVEs aren't useful anyway, hence I am not sure
we should start with that now, because it is either inherently incomplete or
blesses the nonsensical part of the CVE circus which we really shouldn't
bless..."</blockquote>
<p>- Lennart Poettering, systemd lead developer</p>
<p><b>My thoughts:</b> CVEs are supposed to be for security, and a log of when they
were found and their severity, so yes, it <em>is</em> the correct way to
announce it. It seems as if over 95 security-concious people think the same.</p>
<p>Source:
<a href="https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/6225#issuecomment-311739869">systemd GitHub Issue 6225</a></p>
</section>
<section id="issue-2">
<h2><a href="#issue-2">Issue #2 - Security is a Circus</a></h2>
<blockquote>"I am not sure I buy enough into the security circus to do that
though for any minor issue..."</blockquote>
<p>- Lennart Poettering, systemd lead developer</p>
<p>Source:
<a href="https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/5144#issuecomment-276740654">systemd GitHub Issue 5144</a></p>
</section>
<section id="issue-3">
<h2><a href="#issue-3">Issue #3 - Blaming the User</a></h2>
<blockquote><p>"Yes, as you found out "0day" is not a valid username. I wonder
which tool permitted you to create it in the first place. Note that not
permitting numeric first characters is done on purpose: to avoid ambiguities
between numeric UID and textual user names.</p>
<p>systemd will validate all configuration data you drop at it, making it hard to
generate invalid configuration. Hence, yes, it's a feature that we don't permit
invalid user names, and I'd consider it a limitation of xinetd that it doesn't
refuse an invalid username.</p>
<p>So, yeah, I don't think there's anything to fix in systemd here. I understand
this is annoying, but still: the username is clearly not valid."</p></blockquote>
<p>- Lennart Poettering, systemd lead developer</p>
<p><b>My thoughts:</b> systemd was the thing that allowed root access just because a
username started with a number, then Poettering blamed the user.</p>
<p>Source:
<a href="https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-311900864">systemd GitHub Issue 6237</a></p>
</section>
</body>
</html>