Re: Embarrassing security bug in systemd
On Fri 08 Dec 2017 at 19:26:41 +0000, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 07:09:06PM +0100, Menelaos Maglis wrote:
> > > > > Basically, it was a completely inconsistent mess before systemd.
> > > > > Now you at least have a central place where you can configure your
> > > > > system behaviour.
> > > In the past, we had *no consistency*: inittab had one thing, display
> > > managers another, ACPI scripts another...if you wanted a specific
> > > policy, you had to change three or more separate systems.
> > >
> > > Along came [a new system] which provided a single place to define a
> > > consistent policy.
> >
> > systemd provides a single place to define a consistent policy, provided
> > your system uses systemd.
>
> That's a good point.
Not really. systemd doesn't stop providing a single place to define a
consistent policy because a set of users do not use it.
>
> > Debian GNU/Linux offers alternative init systems, which people choose
> > and use. They have their, often different, "default" settings.
>
> It would perhaps be a good idea for the policy to be determined in an
> init-agnostic way.o
>
> > In anycase, it should be a documented configuration option to allow
> > for alternative use cases.
>
> No objection there, and I agree that the release notes should probably
> have covered the policy changes. That ship has now sailed unfortunately.
A bug report against the release notes with a patch is always worth a
try.
--
Brian.
Reply to: