this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
1300 points (99.2% liked)

linuxmemes

25327 readers
1615 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack users for any reason. This includes using blanket terms, like "every user of thing".
  • Don't get baited into back-and-forth insults. We are not animals.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn, no politics, no trolling or ragebaiting.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, <loves/tolerates/hates> systemd, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  • 5. 🇬🇧 Language/язык/Sprache
  • This is primarily an English-speaking community. 🇬🇧🇦🇺🇺🇸
  • Comments written in other languages are allowed.
  • The substance of a post should be comprehensible for people who only speak English.
  • Titles and post bodies written in other languages will be allowed, but only as long as the above rule is observed.
  • 6. (NEW!) Regarding public figuresWe all have our opinions, and certain public figures can be divisive. Keep in mind that this is a community for memes and light-hearted fun, not for airing grievances or leveling accusations.
  • Keep discussions polite and free of disparagement.
  • We are never in possession of all of the facts. Defamatory comments will not be tolerated.
  • Discussions that get too heated will be locked and offending comments removed.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS
     
    top 50 comments
    sorted by: hot top controversial new old
    [–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

    You keep using that term “mental gymnastics”. I’m not sure it means what you think it does.

    [–] OmegaLemmy@discuss.online 5 points 1 day ago

    still funny

    [–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 day ago

    Is this about XZ?

    [–] 5PACEBAR@lemmy.world 77 points 2 days ago
    [–] bender223@lemmy.today 35 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Open source and proprietary software development have very different goals. Open source is generally about making software that's useful. Proprietary software's goal is to make money by any means necessary. Viewing it from that angle, open source devs and the community are more motivated to keep an eye out for backdoors. While proprietary software, they won't give a fuck until something affects their bottom line. Just because of that, I feel safer using open source software in general.

    [–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

    The sad part is is that you're right.

    And the reason that it's sad is that most of the individual veneers on proprietary projects deeply about a project itself and have the same goals as they do with open source software, which is just to make something that's useful and do cool shit.

    Yep, the business itself can force them not take care of problems or force them to go in directions that are counter to their core motivations.

    load more comments (1 replies)
    [–] SatyrSack@lemmy.sdf.org 310 points 2 days ago (10 children)

    Immediately get noticed

    Realistically, though, we are only aware of that one because it was noticed in that unlikely scenario and then widely reported. For all we know, most open source backdoors are alive and well in our computers, having gone unnoticed for years.

    [–] towerful@programming.dev 118 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Yup.
    But in open source it CAN be noticed, by anyone determined enough to dig into its side effects.
    Proprietary software? You file a regression bug that startup takes 500ms longer, and it might get looked at.

    Also, backdoors that are discovered in open source software improve automated software auditing.

    [–] alaphic@lemmy.world 69 points 2 days ago

    500ms longer, and it might get looked at.

    Why would you even lie to the poor fellow like that? 🤣 lol

    [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

    Yeah, you open a bug like that in proprietary software and it will immediately get rationalized away as having no business case to address, likely with a person with zero direct development responsibility writing a bs explanation like the small impact was due to a number of architectural changes.

    Speaking as someone with years of exposure to business managed issue handling.

    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 2 days ago

    I feel like its a mixed bag. Certainly there's an infinitely higher chance of someone randomly noticing a backdoor in OSS than in closed source simply because any OSS project in use has someone looking at it. Many closed systems have dusty corners that haven't had programmer eyes on them in years.

    But also, modern dev requires either more vigilance than most of us have to give or more trust than most of us would ideally be comfortable offering. Forget leftpad, I've had npm dependencies run a full python script to compile and build sub dependencies. Every time I run npm update, it could be mining a couple of bitcoins for all I know in addition to installing gigs and gigs of other people's code.

    The whole industry had deep talks after leftpadgate about what needed to be done and ultimately, not much changed. NPM changed policy so that people couldn't just dissapear their packages. But we didn't come up with some better way.

    Pretty much every language has its own NPM now, the problem is more widespread than ever. With Rust, it can run arbitrary macros and rust code in the build files, it can embed C dependencies. I'm not saying it would be super easy to hide something in cargo, i haven't tried so I don't know, but i do think the build system is incredibly vulnerable to supply chain attacks. A dependency chain could easily pull in some backdoor native code, embed it deep into your app, and you might never realize it's even there.

    [–] Ack@lemmy.ca 64 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)
    [–] SatyrSack@lemmy.sdf.org 57 points 2 days ago

    Yes, this particular incident.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XZ_Utils_backdoor

    In February 2024, a malicious backdoor was introduced to the Linux build of the xz utility within the liblzma library in versions 5.6.0 and 5.6.1 by an account using the name "Jia Tan".[b][4] The backdoor gives an attacker who possesses a specific Ed448 private key remote code execution through OpenSSH on the affected Linux system. The issue has been given the Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures number CVE-2024-3094 and has been assigned a CVSS score of 10.0, the highest possible score.[5]

    Microsoft employee and PostgreSQL developer Andres Freund reported the backdoor after investigating a performance regression in Debian Sid.[8] Freund noticed that SSH connections were generating an unexpectedly high amount of CPU usage as well as causing errors in Valgrind,[9] a memory debugging tool.[10]

    [–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 47 points 2 days ago (4 children)

    Thats not really how open source works. If you use an open source tool like say, nano. It has been looked at and improved for many years by many people who have worked up an understanding of the code.

    I realize that this can only be natively understood by a programmer.

    What we (I) do when we work at open source projects is reading through the code for so long until we "get it". It means we start to understand what does what. If you want so change something, you must locate it, finding out what it is not. The chance that someone stumbles across something that then sparks a full blown investigation isnt that low. Of course you can hide something in extremely long and boring code but its alas automatically tested by most software shops.

    In short: we dont do this since yesterday and opeb source is so many universes better than closed source is a truth that only a fool would disregard.

    [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 44 points 2 days ago (14 children)

    Are you sure?

    All I'm saying is leftPad, if you still remember.

    As a programmer I do not believe you when you claim that you read through all the code of all the libraries you include.

    Especially with more hardcore dependencies (like OpenSSL), hardly anyone reads through that.

    load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] rtxn@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    That's assuming the attacker is stupid enough to put the exploit in the source code where it can be easily discovered.

    The Xz exploit was not present in the source code.

    It was hidden in the makefile as an obfuscated string and injected into the object file during the build process.

    load more comments (3 replies)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

    Evidence suggests this isn't the case.

    We know of so many more closed source backdoors despite them being harder to notice in practice. Either before they became a problem or after they have been used in an attack. So we know backdoors can get noticed even without access to source code.

    Meanwhile we have comparatively fewer backdoor type findings in major open source software, despite and thanks to increased scrutiny. So many people want to pad their resume with "findings" and go hit up open source software relentlessly. This can be obnoxious because many of the findings are flat out incorrect or have no actual security implications, but among the noise is a relatively higher likelihood that real issues get noticed.

    The nature of the xz attack shows the increased complexity associated with attempting to back door open source. Sneaking a malicious binary patch into test data, because the source code would be too obvious, and having to hide asking the patch in an obfuscated way in build scripts that would only apply in theory under specific circumstances. Meanwhile the closed source backdoors have frequently been pretty straightforward but still managed to ship and not be detected.

    Even if we failed to detect unused backdoors, at some point someone would actually want to use their backdoor, so they should be found at some point.

    [–] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago

    For all we know...

    This isn't something we need to speculate about. The vulnerability histories of popular closed and open source tools are both part of public data sets.

    Looking into that data, the thing that stands out is that certain proprietary software vendors have terrible security track records, and open source tools from very small teams may be a mixed bag.

    [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 20 points 2 days ago (3 children)

    I haven't really seen any evidence to support this

    [–] Gladaed@feddit.org 18 points 2 days ago (1 children)
    load more comments (1 replies)
    load more comments (2 replies)
    load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] Plesiohedron@lemmy.cafe 37 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    This is why open source, total transparency, radical free speech and democracy is the one and only way. Because if there's even one little shadow there will be a scorpion hiding in it.

    [–] tfm@europe.pub 24 points 2 days ago (14 children)

    radical free speech

    If that includes calling company money "free speech" (which the US does) I don't agree. I'm also not ok with holocaust denial and Naziism.

    load more comments (14 replies)
    [–] SanityRequired@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

    Is this still true in the age of targeted social media propaganda?

    Seems to me that radical free speech without moderating for basic accuracy or malicious disinfo has pretty much kicked of the downfall of the American experiment

    load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] rumba@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago

    Meanwhile my NixOS install had a failure to mount an encrypted swap at boot costing me 1 and a half minutes of downtime on every boot that only took 30 seconds to fix but 6 months to get around to.

    [–] pemptago@lemmy.ml 44 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Also, many proprietary softwares rely on open source libraries. So unless they catch, patch, and do not contribute those fixes, proprietary will be at least as vulnerable as the oss they depend on.

    load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] MrMobius@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    Makes me remember, wasn't there a well respected dev who, out of the blue, decided to add a vulnerability in a linux package last year?

    [–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

    That’s what this meme is referencing. That was the XZ Utils backdoor. The contributor spent 5 years gaining the lead dev’s trust, waited for the lead dev to get busy with other things, then basically bullied the lead dev into handing over control of the project. They quietly pushed an SSH backdoor.

    And then they were almost immediately called out by a dude who was running benchmarks and realized that his SSH requests were taking like 5ms longer than they should. That delay was because the backdoor was checking the SSH request against a table of backdoor requests, to see if it should allow the connection even if the UN/PW was wrong.

    The big concern was that the SSH system was used all over the world. But rolling back to a previous version was easy, and most systems hadn’t updated yet anyways.

    [–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago (2 children)

    yeah this meme is referencing xz

    [–] orosus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

    Para hablantes de español, este video explica la vulnerabilidad de XZutils, a la que hace referencia este meme: https://youtu.be/mTpDmhF4BSw

    load more comments (1 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›