Slashdot Mirror
Automatix 'Actively Dangerous' to Ubuntu
exeme writes "Ubuntu developer Matthew Garrett has recently analyzed famed Ubuntu illegal software installer Automatix, and found it to be actively dangerous to Ubuntu desktop systems. In a detailed report which only took Garrett a couple of hours he found many serious, show-stopper bugs and concluded that Ubuntu could not officially support Automatix in its current state. Garrett also goes on to say that simple Debian packages could provide all of the functionality of Automatix without any of the problems it exhibits."
This is old news, well Automatix being dangerous in general I mean not Mr. Gattett's report. Automatix has been referred to by many as a tool to "enhance" Ubuntu by lazy users who do not care about system security or stability since Breezy Badger.
Automatix is a really nice idea.
But I noticed that all the Ubuntu distros, which it is installed upon, get a range of problems with upgrading to the next release of Ubuntu.
Automatix is not as necessary as it once one, codecs are done by Ubuntu itself in the meantime - Automatix was good two years back when it was a PITA to get DVDs and mp3s to play without editing files and going crazy on the command line.
It still is nice to use to install some programs like virtualbox, but the problems it causes are not worth it.
Automatix only exists because there is a need for it. If it's so simple to make the package provide the functionality, why hasn't anyone done it? Automatix seems to be the (only?) ones who have tried to do something that many people need.
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
What, if you use it do a bunch of pale-skinned 100 pound guys with electronics-laden belts show up at your house, and after they fail at kicking in your door stand outside your house and yell things about RPM's and VI and stuff? Cause that would be cool...
The article is a technical crictism of Automatix, how it doesn't follow proper package rules, etc.
This is the conclusion to the article, which sums it up pretty well
Automatix is barely needed anymore. You can do just about anything through the standard repos these days.
kill all the fucking niggers
You wish your system had security like that.
The Schwartz space ain't from Spaceballs.
As TFA points out, it also gives dubious legal advice. Downloading MP3 codecs or Win32 codecs is far from a crime in the United States. For example, for the Microsoft-created codecs like WMA or WMV, Microsoft only requests that you have a Windows license in order to download them, but does nothing to prevent you from downloading them (WGA checks are not required, for instance.) It could be argued that as long as one has a valid Windows license, using them on Linux is not illegal. As for MP3 or other patent-encumbered codecs, it is a violation of patent law to distribute such codecs. Whether it is a violation of patent law to use or download these codecs without paying a license is a legal gray area.
OTOH, downloading libdvdcss may, in fact, be a violation of the DMCA.
Note that I'm not a lawyer, and if you're looking for legal advice, go pay one.
My blog
Erm, did you even read the analysis? Automatix craps untracked files all over the user's system. It makes to effort to interoperate with Ubuntu's package manager (dpkg) and is even prone to race conditions that could leave the system unbootable!
They already have; the repositories are called 'restricted' and 'multiverse' (the former is supported by Canonical, the latter is not).
Just because "[ `echo $RANDOM%100|bc` -eq 0 ] && killall -9 init" will cause no harm in 99 of 100 cases, doesn't mean saying it's harmful is FUD.
The summary is misleading... in particular the use of the word "illegal."
Automatix is a utility that automates the installation of a bunch of software that is considered "must have" for people just switching to Ubuntu. For instance, it installed Firefox, mplayer, wine, DVD playing software, and multimedia codecs. (Actually the installer would just give you a list of things you could install, you select the ones you want and click "next.")
I don't really understand why this is being characterized as "illegal software." The packages are already in the usual repositories. The utility would just automate the installation for you. If you live in a country where installing one of those packages is somehow illegal (is this actually the case?), then that's your responsibility. The tool is just an automator intended to ease the transition for new users. It really provides nothing above and beyond the standard packaging interface, except that it was easier (in some people's opinion) to tell new users "install automatix" rather than telling them to open the package manager and list the software they should install.
In any case, the whole argument seems rather pointless. Automatix was created a few years ago, at a time where installation of things like multimedia codecs was perhaps non-obvious. New users were flooding forums with repeated requests like "my mp3s don't play! why?" and "how can I play DVDs on this Ubuntu thing?" Automatix was created as a simple response to that.
In the meantime, Ubuntu has, from what I can tell, cleared up these issues. Installation of codecs is straightforward and pretty obvious. The package manager is very user friendly. In short, there is no need for Automatix. Basically, Automatix was an ugly hack. It's always been recognized as such, and developers have always discouraging people from using it. On the Ubuntu forums, the standard advice is no longer "install Automatix," since it is recognized to be a non-optimal solution.
So, in short... I think this issue has already passed us by.
Besides the fact that it wasn't, I believe the problem is distributing the software today as the action that violates the DMCA. As confusing as it is, it is not illegal to use libdvdcss, DeCSS, or anything like that, but it is illegal to distribute it (as far as the DMCA says; it could be legal to distribute it as protected free speech, but I don't know if anyone has tried to use that defence since the MPAA backed off in the DVDJon case).
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
The 'illegal' part of this thing is nothing but a footnote.
2 007May18/Logs
The important thing is that it's a stupidly dangerous (to your system) piece of software, that most members of the Ubuntu community are trying to inform everyone about. A lot of community sites swear by it, and when anyone argues they give the 'it works fine for me' argument.
This is not the mentality we want to have as a linux community. The automatix team refuses to make their software better, and launced a few all-out assaults on the communities that warn against it. Even going as far as to say (on their website, up until a few months ago) if you go ask help for automatix in their IRC channel, and claim that the people in the ubuntu channel sent you there, they (automatix team) won't help you. Which is stupid in and of itself, but that's the mentality that the automatix people have exhibited time and time again.
Because of this, and in some random attempt to clear their piece of software (and argue about it's proper terminology whether 'package manager' or 'packaging script' or whatever), and to get their lead developer (arnieboy) unbanned from the ubuntu forums (for trolling, more or less), they went to the Forum Council and petitioned, the forum council rejected some stuff, and said that they shouldn't make a decision on the technical merits (since they're not technically qualified or whatever). I imagine this is the fruit of their lack-of-verdict, someone higher up (who was qualified to assess its technical merits) finally took a semi-official look.
I wish I had links for the meeting, here it is: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/MeetingLogs/ForumCouncil/
Clones are people two.
Medibuntu is a much safer way to install codecs and some third-party apps than Automatix.
Given that I'm the one who wrote that article, and given that most of the code I've recently written is designed to avoid the need for users to touch the command line, that doesn't seem likely.
What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
That stuff is exactly what the "ubuntu-restricted-extras" package is for.
Rather than screw around with Automatix, perhaps someone should post the following script instructions:
I really don't see how installing some random script off a website and then messing with a new GUI program is any easier than that.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
I don't think the summary is claiming Automatix is illegal. It just has to do with the parsing of the sentence. I think the original intent was:
"illegal software" installer
and not
illegal "software installer"
being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
I wish I had a new car.
No? Dang, it's just you.
All comments are properties and trademarks of the voices in my head. Not like I'm gonna claim them.
If you were to learn Linux you would not need Automatix,
Climate Progress - Hell and High Water