- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- linux@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
deleted by creator
That’s true, but you have to know there was a backdoor first. If someone doesn’t know, and they use the latest version, they’re vulnerable to attack
@starman @GarlicToast true but I don’t think you can use nix and not know about the xz exploit within minutes of it being found out.
Do you have an RSS feed of CVEs impacting Nixos?
Anti Commercial AI thingy
I believe the point they were making is that if you are techy enough to use nix, they are likely the type to keep up to date with news like this.
deleted by creator
If the issue had been critical, then the branch head could be rolled back, causing everyone to downgrade
That’s a nice idea in theory but not possible in practice as the last Nixpkgs revision without a tainted version of xz is many months old. You’d trade one CVE for dozens of others.
That works for leaf packages but not for core node packages. Every package depends on xz in some way; it’s in the stdenv aswell as bootstrap.
deleted by creator
Those packages themselves depend on xz. Pretty much all of them.
What you’re suggesting would only make the
xzexecutable not be backdoored anymore but any other application using liblzma would still be as vulnerable as before. That’s actually the only currently known attack vector; inject malicious code into SSHD via liblzma.
