• CameronDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    To be fair, we only know of this one. There may well be other open source backdoors floating around with no detection. Was heartbleed really an accident?

    • lemmyreader@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      True. And the “given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow” is a neat sounding thing from the past when the amount of code lines was not as much as now. Sometimes it is scary to see how long a vulnerability in the Linux kernel had been there for years, “waiting” to be exploited.

      • RecluseRamble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Still far better than a proprietary kernel made by a tech corp, carried hardly changed from release to release, even fewer people maintain, and if they do they might well be adding a backdoor themselves for their government agency friends.

    • xenoclast@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah he didn’t find the right unmaintained project. There are many many many cs undergrads starting projects that will become unmaintained pretty soon.

  • Codex@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ve gotten back into tinkering on a little Rust game project, it has about a dozen dependencies on various math and gamedev libraries. When I go to build (just like with npm in my JavaScript projects) cargo needs to download and build just over 200 projects. 3 of them build and run “install scripts” which are just also rust programs. I know this because my anti-virus flagged each of them and I had to allow them through so my little roguelike would build.

    Like, what are we even suppose to tell “normal people” about security? “Yeah, don’t download files from people you don’t trust and never run executables from the web. How do I install this programming utility? Blindly run code from over 300 people and hope none of them wanted to sneak something malicious in there.”

    I don’t want to go back to the days of hand chisling every routine into bare silicon by hand, but i feel l like there must be a better system we just haven’t devised yet.

    • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Do you really need to download new versions at every build? I thought it was common practice to use the oldest safe version of a dependency that offers the functionality you want. That way your project can run on less up to date systems.

      • baseless_discourse@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Most softwares do not include detailed security fixes in the change log for people to check; and many of these security fixes are in dependencies, so it is unlikely to be documented by the software available to the end user.

        So most of the time, the safest “oldest safe” version is just the latest version.

        • acockworkorange@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          So only protects like Debian do security backports?

          Edit: why the downvote? Is this not something upstream developers do? Security fixes on older releases?

          • Kelly@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Backports for supported versions sure,.

            That’s why there is an incentive to limit support to latest and maybe one previous release, it saves on the backporting burden.

      • treadful@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Okay, but are you still going to audit 200 individual dependencies even once?

    • RegalPotoo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      It’s a really wicked problem to be sure. There is work underway in a bunch of places around different approaches to this; take a look at SBoM (software bill-of-materials) and reproducible builds. Doesn’t totally address the trust issue (the malicious xz releases had good gpg signatures from a trusted contributor), but makes it easier to spot binary tampering.

      • wizzim@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        +1

        Shameless plug to the OSS Review Toolkit project (https://oss-review-toolkit.org/ort/) which analyze your package manager, build a dependency tree and generates a SBOM for you. It can also check for vulnerabilitiea with the help of VulnerableCode.

        It is mainly aimed at OSS Compliance though.

        (I am a contributor)

    • wolf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      THIS.

      I do not get why people don’t learn from Node/NPM: If your language has no exhaustive standard library the community ends up reinventing the wheel and each real world program has hundreds of dependencies (or thousands).

      Instead of throwing new features at Rust the maintainers should focus on growing a trusted standard library and improve tooling, but that is less fun I assume.

        • Miaou@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          It does, but the person you reply to apparently expects a standard library to contain an ECS and a rendering engine.

        • wolf@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 months ago

          Easily, just look at the standard libraries of Java/Python and Golang! :-P

          To get one thing out of the way: Each standard library has dark corners with bad APIs and outdated modules. IMHO it is a tradeoff, and from my experience even a bad standard library works better than everyone reinvents their small module. If you want to compare it to human languages: Having no standard library is like agreeing on the English grammar, but everyone mostly makes up their own words, which makes communication challenging.

          My examples of missing items from the Rust standard library (correct me, if I am wrong, not a Rust user for many reasons):

          • Cross platform GUI library (see SWING/Tk)
          • Enough bits to create a server
          • Full set of data structures and algorithms
          • Full set of serialization format processing XML/JSON/YAML/CVS/INI files
          • HTTP(S) server for production with support for letsencrypt etc.

          Things I don’t know about if they are provided by a Rust standard library:

          • Go like communication channels
          • High level parallelism constructs (like Tokyo etc.)

          My point is, to provide good enough defaults in a standard library which everybody knows/are well documented and taught. If someone has special needs, they always can come up with a library. Further, if something in the standard library gets obsolete, it can easily be deprecated.

          • areyouevenreal@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Python doesn’t have a production web server in its standard library. Neither does Java. Those are external programs or libraries. C# is the only language I know that comes with an official production grade server, and that’s still a separate package (IIS).

            Rust has a set of recommended data structures in their standard libraries too: https://doc.rust-lang.org/std/collections/index.html

            I don’t know what algorithms you are looking for so can’t answer here.

            The rest I don’t think are included in Rust. Then again they aren’t included in most languages standard libraries.

            • wolf@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 months ago

              Golangs web server is production grade and used in production. (Of course everyone uses some high performance proxy like NGINX for serving static pages, that’s another story.)

              Technically you are right that java has no production web server, which I don’t like, OTOH Java has standard APIs WebServers and Spring is the defacto standard for web applications. (I totally would not mind to move Spring into the OpenJDK.)

              My point is simple: Instead of having Rust edtion 2020, 2021 etc. and tweaking the syntax ad infinitum, I’d rather have a community which invests in a good/broad standard library and good tooling.

              The only platform widely used in production w/o a big standard library is Node.js/JavaScript, mostly for historical reasons and look at the problems that Node.js has for a decade now because of the missing standard library.

    • trolololol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I’m not familiar with rust but at least for java there’s a owasp plugin that tells you if you’re using an unsafe library.