Slashdot Mirror


Canonical Developer Warns About Banking With Linux Mint

sfcrazy writes "Ubuntu developer Oliver Grawert does not prefer to do online banking with Linux Mint. In the official mailing list of the distribution, Ubuntu developers stated that the popular Ubuntu derivative is a vulnerable system and people shouldn't go for online banking on it. One of the Ubuntu developers, Oliver Grawert, originally pointed out that it is not necessary that security updates from Ubuntu get down to Linux Mint users since changes from X.Org, the kernel, Firefox, the boot-loader, and other core components are blocked from being automatically upgraded." Clement Lefebvre, the Linux Mint project founder, has since made a statement and confirmed that Oliver Grawert seems "more opinionated than knowledgeable" adding "the press blew what he said out of proportion."

140 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. like we needed more ammo by X0563511 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nice job Oliver - we really needed more ammunition in the Everyone vs Canonical battle.

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    1. Re:like we needed more ammo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Reminds me of the http://xkcd.com/435/ but wtih plain vanilla Debian instead of Mathemeticians.

    2. Re:like we needed more ammo by Darfeld · · Score: 2

      More like Linux from scratch instead of Mathematician, gentooist as physicist, Debian as chemist...

      --
      (\__/) This is Lapinator
      (='.'=) copy it in your sig
      (")_(") so it can take over the world
    3. Re:like we needed more ammo by wile_e8 · · Score: 2

      Linux Mint is based on Ubuntu (or Debian). Ubuntu is based on Debian. Gentoo and LFS are an entirely different branch of the distro family tree.

    4. Re:like we needed more ammo by Eggplant62 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the stupidest thing I've ever read. Not only is it a blow to Mint, but to free software in general. I just got done crowing to friends that Linux isn't full of NSA backdoors, and then this pops up on newsfeed. Sheiss.

      I suppose our developer doesn't understand that one can go with slightly more intelligent tools, like apt-get on the CLI, to get those packages upgraded? If so, he's no developer I'd give a shit about.

    5. Re:like we needed more ammo by fisted · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nice to be on top with LFS, right?
      Wait.. Oh, Hey, we didn't see you guys all the way over there!
      Yours, The BSDs

    6. Re:like we needed more ammo by exomondo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suppose our developer doesn't understand that one can go with slightly more intelligent tools, like apt-get on the CLI, to get those packages upgraded? If so, he's no developer I'd give a shit about.

      He likely does, but that's not really the point is it? It's whether the average users know to do this.

    7. Re:like we needed more ammo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Your joke doesn't actually work. The relationship between BSD and Linux is not analogous to the relationship between math and physics. Linux is not "applied BSD".

      Then, of course, there are those of us who use both because we're not concerned with petty pissing matches.

    8. Re:like we needed more ammo by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Interesting. IBM has been moving to Linux internally for a while, which only makes sense for business reasons. Do you have a cite on banning W8, and running W7 only on VMs?

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    9. Re:like we needed more ammo by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 3, Informative

      LFS isn't a branch, it's more akin to the root. Or maybe a book on growing branches, designed for trees. Which is more accurate but kind of wrecks the metaphor.

    10. Re:like we needed more ammo by donaldm · · Score: 1
      From the follow-up article :

      This claim appears to be mostly based on the fact that Linux Mint, by default, does not install certain updates, because they form a danger to the stability of the system.

      While I don't use Debian based distros I would assume that all packages would be updated when their updates become available unless you explicitly forbid this in the apt-get configuration file (yum can do this as well). I can understand blocking a package if it is suspect but a better way would be to remove it.

      If the developers don't like Firefox then send out a warning not to use it although it would IMHO make them lose credibility unless they could point to security issues that need addressing. Of course you could always install "Chrome" but do the developers have something against this browser.

      Personally under Fedora 19 I use both Firefox (25.0) and Chrome (Version: 31.0.1650.48) which are pretty much the latest releases for that distribution. I also use both browsers for Internet Banking so why can't Mint use the latest version of Firefox, after all it is only a package that does not "taint" the kernel.

      From the listing of the Firefox package (remember I am doing this under Fedora 19 however Debian based distros can do this as well):
      1) /usr/bin/firefox --- The Firefox startup script, which in-turn points to the binary "/usr/lib64/firefox/firefox".
      2) /usr/lib64/firefox --- The directory all libraries are installed under.
      3) /usr/lib64/mozilla/extensions --- Any Firefox extensions you may have.
      4) /usr/share/applications/firefox.desktop --- Firefox desktop configuration.
      5) /usr/share/icons/ --- Firefox icons.
      6) /usr/share/man/man1/firefox.1.gz --- The manual entry.
      That is it and when Firefox is started it runs under the user name (No one in their right mind runs as root ;)). So to the developers of Mint pray tell what issues have you found with Firefox since it could affect all Linux distributions.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    11. Re:like we needed more ammo by Adam+Jorgensen · · Score: 2

      Agreed. Just because I tried PCBSD and it failed to work at all on my laptop doesn't mean I hate PCBSD and BSD in general. I'm not the target audience and I recognise that.

    12. Re:like we needed more ammo by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      While I don't use Debian based distros I would assume that all packages would be updated when their updates become available unless you explicitly forbid this in the apt-get configuration file (yum can do this as well). I can understand blocking a package if it is suspect but a better way would be to remove it.

      Yes, but a Debian-based distro does not point apt-get to the main Debian repository. It has its own repository. Ubuntu has an Ubuntu repository, and Mint has a Mint repository. If they don't put an update to their repository, it doesn't happen.

    13. Re:like we needed more ammo by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

      Redhat is Microsoft. Cannonical is Apple.

    14. Re:like we needed more ammo by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2

      How exactly did you verify this?

      ps -A | grep -i nsa

      returned no results!

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    15. Re:like we needed more ammo by Dishevel · · Score: 1
      No. The point was for him to slam Mint.

      That is what he did. That was all he did. The internet is not one bit safer after he said that. In fact his statements will move a few of the stupid moo cows back to Windows. So the internet is a little worse now.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    16. Re:like we needed more ammo by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      Except that Mint has both Mint repositories and Ubuntu's in it's configuration. What am I missing?

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    17. Re:like we needed more ammo by allo · · Score: 2

      bsd is unix, linux is applied unix.

    18. Re:like we needed more ammo by exomondo · · Score: 1

      For god's sake it was one person giving his opinion on their updating practices, it was then clarified by Mint that those package updates can be enabled through enabling of Unsafe and Dangerous update sets, the Update Manager Preferences do not make it clear that this could potentially include critical security updates so if this means people are now better informed and will now get critical security updates for kernel and xorg then that is a good thing. Why are so many people blowing this out of proportion? Do they really believe there is that much childish hate in these communities that every little negative comment - uninformed or not - is an attack on eachother?

    19. Re:like we needed more ammo by Dishevel · · Score: 1

      Do they really believe there is that much childish hate in these communities that every little negative comment - uninformed or not - is an attack on eachother?

      Ummm.

      Yes.

      --
      Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
    20. Re:like we needed more ammo by fisted · · Score: 1

      Tell GP ;). Or do you think stuff like "Debian is applied Gentoo"?

  2. Lots of this lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    if you can't say how good your product is. tell everyone how shitty everyone elses product is.

    1. Re:Lots of this lately by similar_name · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sounds like politics.

  3. SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid by lesincompetent · · Score: 1

    Too bad i use sudo apt-get dist-upgrade!

    1. Re:SubjectsInCommentsAreStupid by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Too bad i use sudo apt-get dist-upgrade!

      Exactly. In all other aspects I think Linux Mint is great but their retarded attitude in not allowing this or making it easy is just a pain in the arse.

      I understand their perspective as I have been using Linux for decades but I do not agree with it and probably never will. Let those of us to who want to have a quick way of doing an in place upgrade of important packages do so then just resolve any shit that crops up later. Even if the system fails to boot then most of us are used to resolving those issues anyway so can probably resolve it.

      This is one area where Ubuntu always worked perfectly in the years I used it so I saw no reason to change it. I only dumped Ubuntu because I vastly preferred the Mate Desktop over Unity.

      Name me one other OS that actually prevents you from doing an upgrade to a recent version without doing a full reinstall?

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
  4. Not very diplomatic by johnsie · · Score: 2

    The guy is obviously lacking in basic social skills. Sadly the Ubuntu developers and forum admins are alienating themselves rather than doing anything useful for Linux.

    1. Re:Not very diplomatic by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where on its websites and -pages does Ubuntu ever mention the word Linux?

    2. Re:Not very diplomatic by Desler · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Not very diplomatic by donaldm · · Score: 2

      Where on its websites and -pages does Ubuntu ever mention the word Linux?

      No where, if you exclude lists, wiki and irclogs.

      Try this site (thanks Desler) then the second paragraph down. I''ll even save you the bother of looking by quoting the second paragraph:

      Linux was already established as an enterprise server platform in 2004, but free software was not a part of everyday life for most computer users. That's why Mark Shuttleworth gathered a small team of developers from one of the most established Linux projects – Debian – and set out to create an easy-to-use Linux desktop: Ubuntu.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  5. Missing context by Fwipp · · Score: 5, Informative

    TFS makes it sounds like it's a long article about how Linux Mint is insecure.

    Here's the entirety of his commentary:

    Do you think that Linux Mint is a vulnerable system ? Really ?

    https://github.com/linuxmint/mintupdate/blob/master/usr/lib/linuxmint/mintUpdate/rules

    this is the list of packages it will never update, instead of just
    integrating changes properly with the packagaes in the ubuntu archive
    they instead suppress doing (security) updates at all for them.

    i would say forcefully keeping a vulnerable kernel browser or xorg in
    place instead of allowing the provided security updates to be installer
    makes it a vulnerable system, yes

    i personally wouldn't do online banking with it ;)

    ciao
            oli

    1. Re:Missing context by ttucker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is a pretty fucking good point too, that list of rules contains update exclusions that certainly would affect security.

    2. Re:Missing context by Pichu0102 · · Score: 1

      Am I reading that file incorrectly, or does it list Flash as a package to never update?

    3. Re:Missing context by rsmith-mac · · Score: 1

      If you're reading it incorrectly, then both of us are. That's how I read it too.

    4. Re:Missing context by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 2

      You are both reading it incorrectly - or rather, the context needed to read it is missing. The number refers to the "safety level" of the update:

      1 - from Linux Mint developers
      2 - tested to be safe
      3 - untested but probably safe
      4 - untested and may cause problems
      5 - known to cause problems with some hardware

      The flash package is 2, that is, tested and shown to not cause any problems. Levels 1 to 3 are automatically selected to be installed when updating.

    5. Re:Missing context by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 5, Informative

      Levels 4 and 5 ("unsafe", in that they may cause things to stop working) are not automatically selected when updating - which is fine with me. Video drivers may need to be reinstalled when performing a kernel update, for example. My issue is that they are not visible by default. It's easy to change in the preferences (there are "safe" and "visible" checkmarks for each level, so I have it set up so I can see if there is a kernel update available and select it when I want to install it) but novice users may miss this.

    6. Re: Missing context by Pichu0102 · · Score: 1

      Ohh, I think I remember seeing those numbers in the update manager of my Linux Mint VM. Yeah, that makes sense. Although I'm wondering, what do they do about high urgency updates they normally don't do because it breaks things, haven't tested, but still have to be put out to all systems anyways due to whatever, say a major security hole. Where would that fall on the 1 to 5 scale of updates?

    7. Re:Missing context by synapse7 · · Score: 1

      Would that also apply to sudo apt-get update and sudo apt-get upgrade?

    8. Re:Missing context by ttucker · · Score: 2

      Would that also apply to sudo apt-get update and sudo apt-get upgrade?

      No. You can complain that apt will install dangerous updates that break things, because it does. It is impossible to complain that it will not keep you on the bleeding edge of technology,

    9. Re:Missing context by ttucker · · Score: 1

      I understand the motivation for the hidden update list. The scary ones on there, in my eyes, are the things that might face the public internet. Kernels are frequently updated for security, and web browsers are the worst.

  6. what? by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Funny

    The makers of Zeitgeist are concerned about privacy??

    1. Re:what? by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      It seems you jest, but zeitgeist by itself, since it doesn't upload your data online, is quite convenient if you don't share your computer with others (and then again you can blacklist your porn folders). I create documents, images and music constantly, and zeitgeist makes it handy to organize and locate them by date or such, or to have some statistics about my own work flow. I consider it quite convenient, really.

  7. This is why... by sgage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I don't want anything more to do with Canonical, or Ubuntu, or Mint, or any of that lot. I'm sticking with Debian. I'm sure it has its problems and all, but at least the politics seem to remain mostly internal. These public pissing matches between distros just seem so counter-productive. But since I've been using Linux (1998), it seems to be a constant. Ego issues? I don't know. I don't particularly care. It's just so boring and off-putting.

    1. Re:This is why... by jones_supa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I personally am seeing BSDs as an increasingly interesting choice.

    2. Re:This is why... by c0d3g33k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With all due respect, working on Linux distributions is, for the most part, a thankless job. People certainly aren't doing it for the money - they are doing it because they passionately care about what they are doing. Aaaand ... passionate people sometimes react before they think, sometimes they are misinformed, because they are crazy busy doing their best to provide quality software to you for nothing. Because they care enough to do what they are doing when few others do. And they do it all in public for all to see ... and are judged for it, quite often by those who don't participate or understand. I'd ask you to take that into account before you dismiss passionate outbursts as "pissing matches" with a wave of the hand - you're just getting a glimpse into "how the sausage is made". Get over it. That's how humans operate. The beauty of the FL/OSS ecosystem is that you don't have to listen to the discussions that create your software for you - just use what you like based on its technical merits. Maybe if you feel gratitude for the gift you've been given you might even say "thank you" now and then. But if you're making your technical decisions based solely on what you misperceive as "politics", you are doing it wrong.

    3. Re:This is why... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This doesn't sound like a pissing match so much as an Ubuntu guy being an ass and a corresponding Mint guy rolling his eyes. The urine is flowing one way.

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    4. Re:This is why... by riis138 · · Score: 1

      Fedora works for me as well. It does everything I need it to do, plays well with my Windows boxes, and you rarely hear anything negative about it.

      --
      Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -Carl Sagan
    5. Re:This is why... by sgage · · Score: 1

      With all due respect, I understand what you've said. When I employed the term 'politics' I was using it in the broadest possible sense, over the many years I've been using Linux.

      I don't care about any of the bickering that goes on, until it becomes public and makes an ass out of all involved. I understand how humans operate, and how the sausage is made.

      But kindly don't be telling me to "get over it". FL/OSS is about a lot more than just basing one's decisions on technical merit alone. There's trying to have an understand of trends and reliability and this kind of bullshit is really not useful.

    6. Re:This is why... by Iskender · · Score: 2, Insightful

      because they are crazy busy doing their best to provide quality software to you for nothing.

      Uhh, the guy flaming in this case is working for Ubuntu. I don't know this, but I'd bet he's *employed* by Ubuntu.

      Meaning, he probably has even fewer excuses.

      And if making distros is a thankless job, maybe he should have some respect for others doing it? The guy behaved badly, end of story.

    7. Re:This is why... by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. Been using Linux for many years myself. But part of the FL/OSS model is to do things in public, because that's considered superior to face-saving-do-it-all-in-secret approach that hides all the actual work behind a veneer of congeniality. So don't 'get over it'.

    8. Re:This is why... by sensei+moreh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Fedora, Mint, Ubuntu. I run all three. Mint for Cinnamon, the other two (with LXDE desktops) because sometimes one just works better than the other. Pissing matches are those who've been drinking too much beer.

      --
      Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
    9. Re:This is why... by Windwraith · · Score: 3, Informative

      Seeing the originating comment is pretty much a harmless comment made on an Ubuntu mailing list, I think you are being misled by the flamebaiting article wording.

      All the guy said accounts to "this is a list of packages it won't update by default. I don't consider those choices very safe". How is this even newsworthy? And not only slashdot, other sites are making way too much of it.
      Also, notice this post so rich in Canonical evil ending with a ";)", I mean come on. This is news as much as somebody posting "lol ps4 sucks" on twitter.

    10. Re:This is why... by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      I've been using Fedora since it was called "RedHat Linux" and it has always played well with everything else, works well in both dev and server roles, and the best thing about it, it isn't "cool" at all! Most of the users just want a stable distro that works and is pragmatic.

      Somebody wants a trendy distro, guaranteed the blogs are going to be full of asshat wannabe hipsters.

    11. Re:This is why... by riis138 · · Score: 1

      Very true

      --
      Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -Carl Sagan
    12. Re:This is why... by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

      because they are crazy busy doing their best to provide quality software to you for nothing.

      And if making distros is a thankless job, maybe he should have some respect for others doing it? The guy behaved badly, end of story.

      Exactly. "The guy behaved badly ..." . The guy - singular. It takes the contribution of a lot of people, both "employed" and volunteers to make a Linux distribution happen. Rejecting the good work of all those people merely because the public nature of FL/OSS development allows the comments of a vocal minority to be blown out of proportion because it serves the needs of those who need to make newsworthy headlines by creating false controversy strikes me as ill-advised and narrow-minded. Judge the work on its technical merits, not on irrelevancies resulting from humans being human.

  8. Pot and kettle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why would you want to use a different distro where you don't know what could happen to your personal info;Here at Canonical we build the selling of your private info right into the menu!

  9. Re:banksters by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    worry more about using 'secure' https in your company.

    more often than not, there will be a corp firewall there and you can bet that if you didn not build your entire software system yourself (ie, install your own distro from scratch and solely control its root pw) that you have a bogus cert or two installed and you'll get MitM'd.

    windows, macOS, linux - does not matter. if you go thru a corp router, you are probably not secure.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  10. +1 Article Troll by ADRA · · Score: 3, Informative

    And nothing of value was lost.

    --
    Bye!
    1. Re:+1 Article Troll by squisher · · Score: 5, Informative

      While the article may not have very diplomatic wording, the essence is true: I installed Linux Mint about a year ago, and liked it. But I had to switch to a different distribution after a couple of months because there were virtually NO updates coming in at all. I'd say that Ubuntu updates like crazy, but no updates at all in several months makes it very likely that they just don't have enough manpower to provide such a service. And that does make your distribution vulnerable. My experience may be outdated, but I'd bet it's still the same given this article...

    2. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't use Mint anymore myself - chiefly because my normal laptop died and Fedora plays more happily with Macbook's twisted form of EFI, and also partly because I spent so long administering Red Hat and then Fedora Core boxes that Fedora comes more naturally to me - but my anecdotal evidence is different. I didn't see Mint updating slowly at all. I can't say I paid much attention to kernel updates, but other patches came through as regularly as on any other distribution.

      For constant kernel updates and the attendent fun wondering if *this* is the update that will break your wifi or graphics support, nothing beats Fedora.

      Disclaimer for those taking Slashdot a bit too seriously: Fedora's constant kernel updates have only twice broken my wifi or graphics support, and that's chiefly because of a small latency in the drivers being updated that I wouldn't have noticed had I just waited about twenty minutes. It is irritating plugging the damn machine into the router again (they live in different rooms, and I'm no fan of trailing metre after metre of cable around), but that's the price you pay for updating without thinking.

    3. Re:+1 Article Troll by wile_e8 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Read the statement from Clem in the summary. Linux Mint updates just as fast as Ubuntu on most things, but has certain updates that could potentially crash otherwise stable machines disabled as a default. If you are really concerned about these to avoid vulnerability, they are easy to enable. Nothing about Linux Mint updates are slow after you enable them.

    4. Re:+1 Article Troll by bmo · · Score: 2

      Fedora's constant kernel updates ... It is irritating plugging the damn machine into the router again (they live in different rooms, and I'm no fan of trailing metre after metre of cable around), but that's the price you pay for updating without thinking.

      And this is why you keep at least one old kernel in Grub to boot from. I've never had a kernel kill wireless (Atheros FTW) but I've had kernels I didn't like that had regressions elsewhere.

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:+1 Article Troll by exomondo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem is these are labeled Unsafe Packages and Dangerous Packages, now with those descriptions what user is going to say "yes I want those"? It states that these can affect stability, which is true, but leaves out that they could be critical security patches, which is also true.

      The real beneficial fix to end users here would be to state the whole truth about these updates.

    6. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      Actually these days I've got about six of them. Twice bitten, thrice shy...

    7. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The Macbook Pro was provided by work. Since I had it more than three years it passed into my ownership. I tend to develop in Fortran, and the tools available in OSX for Fortran development range between the piss poor and the non-existent, whereas Fortran development tools in Linux are at least capable. (On a decent enough machine, Code::Blocks with the IDE for Fortran plug-in is a pretty decent IDE for Fortran development - better than others I've found. For some reason I just don't get on with Eclipse and Photran.) As a result, I put Fedora onto my Macbook so that I can develop natively.

      Just different tools for different jobs, really. My Windows desktop has Windows and Fedora on it, my Macbook has OSX and Fedora. Depending what I'm doing I'll stick in Windows or OSX, or I'll reboot into Linux, which I chiefly use as a development environment I've got total control over. The crappy old laptop I've got has Lubuntu. I spend most of my time in OSX and still do a fair bit of my development in it (Aquamacs, out of preference) because I prefer its interface to the alternatives, which don't run as well on the hardware.

      (Also, to be pedantic, Darwin isn't BSD but rather a weird kind of Frankenstein between true Mach, which is a microkernel, and BSD, along with what started as much of the FreeBSD userland. Ultimately it's easy to compile up most command-line tools on - even easier if you use MacPorts or Fink - but less easy to compile most graphical interfaces without a bit more effort, and then running through Xquartz etc.)

    8. Re:+1 Article Troll by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      fortran, really?

      fortran is an algol-like language (well, sort of). why not use C, at least? I'm seriously curious.

      I have not touched fortran for over 30 yrs. I'm amazed there is even 1 person still using it!

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    9. Re:+1 Article Troll by jedidiah · · Score: 2

      Except from the point of view of system stability and change control, Mint polices are actually the ones that make sense. Dicking around with the kernel or Xorg SHOULD be treated like it's dangerous and that terminology should be exposed to the "poor frightened" end users.

      "Crucial to Linux components working with one another. Do not install unless you are experiencing a problem which you believe the upgrade will solve"

      Sounds sensible actually.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    10. Re:+1 Article Troll by Riddler+Sensei · · Score: 1

      My experience may be outdated...

      I see what you did there.

    11. Re:+1 Article Troll by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Except from the point of view of system stability and change control

      No, it already does highlight that, what it doesn't mention is the fact that these might contain critical security patches.

    12. Re:+1 Article Troll by Rob+Simpson · · Score: 1

      It does refer to them as "Unsafe packages. Could potentially affect the stability of the system." and "Dangerous packages. Known to affect the stability of systems depending on certain specs or hardware.", which isn't all that bad. Certainly "unsafe" and "dangerous" could be changed and the possible security implications could be mentioned, though.

    13. Re:+1 Article Troll by ifiwereasculptor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We all know that's important. However, for the regular user, someone remotely exploiting a xorg bug is way less likely than a video driver fuckup (especially if the user opted for a blob). And whoever doesn't know what xorg or a kernel are is unlikely to solve the problem when presented with a terminal, thus dooming the machine completely. So yes, Mint's way makes more sense for the unaware user. And the aware user can configure it to his liking.

    14. Re:+1 Article Troll by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      fortran, really? fortran is an algol-like language (well, sort of). why not use C, at least? I'm seriously curious.

      There is still a significant amount of old scientific and numerical code out there built around Fortran. Good discussion here: http://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_FORTRAN_an_outdated_programming_language2

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    15. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 2

      blah blah blah lol fortran etc

      if it helps, i program in f03. there are some irritating quirks about the language, but there are about any. c would be a regression for me, given its shitty array handling and lack of easy data hiding. c++ would be the closer comparison, but still has teh shitty array handling. plus, all the libraries i'm dealing with are in fortran and i'm building on previous code in fortran. it's heavily used in science and despite mockery thrown at it by people who've never even bothered looking at it, is a perfectly servicable language.

    16. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      I use OSX almost all the time I'm not programming and even some of the time I am. (And I'm not trying to hide the fact it's heavily indebted to BSD. Mach itself is indebted to BSD, after all, and Darwin isn't even pure Mach. And as you say the kernel really isn't that important for the user experience.)

    17. Re:+1 Article Troll by Gunstick · · Score: 1

      tell that to my root kernel exploit I had during 6 months unpatched last year on my Mint laptop. That's a clear Mint fail. And there is no excuse for unstable or dangerous.
      I also never ever had an unstability via a new kernel, and I have run ubuntu since it started.

      --
      Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
    18. Re:+1 Article Troll by Nimey · · Score: 1

      IME Mint updates fairly quickly, it's LMDE (the Debian-based version) that has really slow updates for everything besides web browsers.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    19. Re:+1 Article Troll by Taibhsear · · Score: 1

      Did you check to make sure there wasn't an error? I know of some errors currently where the updater program doesn't function properly and locks up synaptic and the software manager as well but doesn't show the error unless you open it with the command line. So to the casual user it just looks like there's no updates. I currently have this issue but plan to just deal with it until Mint 16 comes out in a few weeks and just wipe and install fresh.

    20. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      Oh, I've got gfortran on the machine - v4.9.0. But I don't find that Code::Blocks works well in OSX at all - maybe it's just my display, but the dialog boxes are everywhere, menus are sized bigger than the screen etc. Eclipse works OK in OSX; I just don't get on with it or Photran very well. NetBeans doesn't seem to have good Fortran support (though I'd be very happy to be proven wrong) and I've never got XCode hanging all that well with Fortran but in fairness haven't tried since I upgraded to Mavericks.

      What I'm looking for is a decent IDE: code completion, object (or symbol) browsers, graphical debugging, the ability to jump from the use of a function to its definition (and declaration if it's held in an interface), etc. The only thing I've found in Fortran that's basically what I want is Code::Blocks but for whatever reason it doesn't seem to play happily with my Mac, which is why when I'm working on the OSX side I use command line and Emacs the way God intended.

      If your Fortran developers have any good advice I'd be very happy to hear it. I'm not beholden to any one IDE or operating system...

    21. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      Not used Arch since about 2008 or so. I was really quite fond of it, but I don't think I went through too many kernel upgrades. Didn't *seem* to break anything that often.

    22. Re:+1 Article Troll by boristhespider · · Score: 1

      Yeah I know, and I shouldn't have been so snide in my reply. My issue is mainly that people hear "Fortran" and think FORTRAN 77 and then repeat a load of jokes their professors taught them which they'd originally learned in 1985 (when they were valid). FORTRAN 77 is a horrible language and I hate it when I have to dig through some of the ugly code I've ended up having to use from it. It's not so much that people don't like FORTRAN 77 that winds me up - that's a perfectly understandable attitude because it is horrible; have fun with implicit typing and common blocks with variables renamed and names reused, and see the mess you'll quickly find yourself in - but that they carry on throwing mockery around that basically shows nothing but their own ignorance.

      That said, the first time I tried to get F03 (actually I think it was F08) to act as a fully object-oriented language it was a frustrating procedure - but in the end when you see how they've fitted the syntax into what they had from F95 it makes some sense. And of course not every language has to be object oriented anyway...

  11. Updates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Delete the preferences file in /etc/apt. Simple solution.

  12. Talk about fud and flat out lies. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

    So everything that is a derivative of something else is vulnerable?

    Isn't Ubuntu a derivative of Debian?

    --
    I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
  13. Well duh... by 101percent · · Score: 1

    Everyone who knows anything about security and follows linux distros, of which mint is popular enough for it not to slip under the radar; these people should know mint doesn't have security advisories nor mailing lists nor a security "team" such as it's grandparent distro. What is canonical thinking? They must like stirring the shit up. What do they have to gain from doing this? They're already on everyone's shitlist.

  14. He's just mad. by imunfair · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's not surprising he'd try to bash Mint, considering they ate part of Ubuntu's marketshare when Ubuntu made stupid design decisions. That's what happens when you try to cram weird GUI changes down peoples throats in open source.

    Don't move my Close, Minimize, and Maximize buttons to the left side by default unless you're going provide some spectacular improvements in return. I tried using it that way for a couple days and was still reflexively clicking on the empty right side to close the window. Eventually I found a config mod that fixed it, but then they went to the stupid Ubuntu mobile desktop and I couldn't be assed to work around it any longer so I switched.

    It's worth mentioning that if you don't like Ubuntu repos, Mint also has a version based directly on Debian.

    1. Re:He's just mad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's EXACTLY the reason I switched to Mint. I really did want to like Ubuntu, gave it a try, and then another try, and then yet another try, and everytime it just became more and more frustrating to use. Mint was mostly frustration free from day one.

    2. Re:He's just mad. by bmo · · Score: 1

      >buttons

      Close on left
      Minimize and Maximize on right. As God and IBM intended.

      It's the first thing I change in KDE and every other environment if I can (if the devs don't remove the friggin' option).

      You'll never fat-finger the Close button again.

      --
      BMO

    3. Re:He's just mad. by Mashdar · · Score: 2

      My favorite was that the Unity bar was smack in the middle of my two monitors regardless of which monitor was the primary. Good thing they didn't want to let anyone move the damned thing.

    4. Re:He's just mad. by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      >buttons

      Close on left
      Minimize and Maximize on right. As God and IBM intended.

      It's the first thing I change in KDE and every other environment if I can (if the devs don't remove the friggin' option).

      You'll never fat-finger the Close button again.

      --
      BMO

      Personally I have never done that anyway, or at least not that I can recall. I guess I am actually able to use a mouse with a greater degree of precision. Yes, I said mouse. If I want a touch OS I will find one and install it, I do not need my desktop OS to slowly morph into one thereby wasting tons of screen real estate as all the buttons become huge.

      Just follow the currently commonly accepted desktop metaphor by default and give us options to change things away from it if we want to. Since it is fairly obvious that most of us do not want to this will work fine. Alternatively make assumptions about which defaults to choose based on whether a touchscreen device is present. If we ever add a touchscreen device in future then you can detect it then and ask us if we want to apply a bunch of fat finger mitigations then if we say yes.

      Just changing it without asking us then forcing us to google for the solution to put it back is just annoying. Since I have to use both windows and linux it makes sense to me for them to behave in a similar manner so I can switch between them easily.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    5. Re:He's just mad. by bmo · · Score: 1

      The button position is something I used under OS/2 20 years ago.

      Just changing it without asking us then forcing us to google for the solution to put it back is just annoying

      I have never understood why the Gnome devs make settings so difficult. People complain about the bloat of KDE, but Gnome is just as fat and KDE's settings are easy to change.

      The claim is that too many options are confusing. I prefer the workspace to work for me, not fight against it.

      >Windows

      I use Windows in a VM.

      If it wasn't hardcoded, I'd change it there too.

      --
      BMO

    6. Re:He's just mad. by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Personally I have never done that anyway, or at least not that I can recall.

      It's what you have under Windows 3.1 and Motif, and to some extent later Windows versions as well : the top left is a menu with maximize, minimize, move, restore etc. and close. Double-clicking the menu (with may be sort of hidden in recent Windows OS or apps) closes the window.
      Most linux desktops / window managers have that same menu, but I couldn't find how to configure them for "double-click to close" (xfce, mate, gnome 2, openbox..)

  15. Ubuntu is noticing Linux Mint by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Good!
    May they suffer.

  16. Somewhat FUD apparently by jones_supa · · Score: 3, Informative

    I found this interesting Google+ post from the Muktware article comments.

  17. Hurd what I tell my clients? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I tell them to use GNU Hurd. It can't actually visit your bank's site, so there's no risk. Plus I think any applications that actually do run, are in userland, and hence are pretty slow. As a result, my clients spend less time on their computer, and more time wheeling and dealing.

  18. Re:banksters - CORRECTION by patiodragon · · Score: 1

    The banksters have AT LEAST ten times your money. It's the law and they are doing God's work, so don't ask questions.

  19. Full Context, Direct Posts, Nothing to see here. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Linux Mint creator's take:
    http://segfault.linuxmint.com/2013/11/answering-controversy-stability-vs-security-is-something-you-configure/
    Summary: Nothing to see here; Let's move on.

    Another person on the same thread:
    http://benjaminkerensa.com/2013/11/18/linux-mint-stay-calm-make-free-software
    Summary: Nothing to see here; Let's move on. Oh, Mate is cool.

    The quoted developer:
    http://ograblog.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/lots-of-canonical-in-my-mouth/
    Summary: Nothing to see here; the Press sucks, let's move on. Oh, Mate is cool.

  20. In other words... by vincentj7 · · Score: 1

    Don't use Mint on Mint.

  21. Here's an article to spite Ubuntu by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    (Ubuntu, which never ever mentions the word Linux on its websites and webpages)

    482 of the Top500 supercomputers run Linux, and China’s Tianhe-2 is the fastest
    http://www.linuxbsdos.com/2013/11/18/482-of-the-top500-supercomputers-run-linux-and-chinas-tianhe-2-is-the-fastest/

    Enjoy!

    1. Re:Here's an article to spite Ubuntu by heypete · · Score: 1

      (Ubuntu, which never ever mentions the word Linux on its websites and webpages)

      That's demonstrably false. There's plenty of references to Linux on the Ubuntu site.

  22. More evidence by riis138 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This is just another piece of evidence that confirms my suspicions. Canonical has been threatened by the Mint project for years now. This is not the first interview that has come out with an Ubuntu dev speaking ill of Mint, and I'm sure it wont be the last.

    --
    Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known. -Carl Sagan
    1. Re:More evidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There were no interview, you dolt. There was this comment and a journalist spinning it in a full-fledged clickbait.

      And now /. spins it further in an anti-Ubuntu FUD. Keep it classy!

    2. Re:More evidence by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      Calm down, it's just your average yellow journalism.

  23. Canonical Failed? by enter+to+exit · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ubuntu is in a rut. They're not making money, growth is plateauing, it's mindshare is diminishing. It's questionable if they'll ever make a profit. I mean why Ubuntu over Novell, Oracle or RedHat for enterprise stuff? RedHat is a billion dollar publicly listed company..Novell is owned by attachemate group (a billion dollar revenue company) and Oracle poops money.

    The Ubuntu Edge was a hail Mary pass that failed. They lack the revenue (and wherewithal) to get into hardware and no hardware maker wants to partner with them.

    I have to wonder, when will shuttleworth stop? Would it be extreme to say Canonical is a failed company? At what point is Ubuntu going to transition into a community driven OS? Ubuntu TV is vapourware, their phone OS relies on someone willing flashing their nexus..They've totally fucked their Desktop OS and it's unclear why anyone would select them for enterprise support considering the breadth of their competition.

    1. Re:Canonical Failed? by dkleinsc · · Score: 3, Insightful

      At what point is Ubuntu going to transition into a community driven OS?

      I'd say it already is transitioning to a community-driven setup, called "Mint". One of the key things that makes the open-source world different from the commercial world is that when an organization starts getting stupid and greedy, someone forks the project, and if they do a better job the user-base just switches to the new project and loses nothing of any great value.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    2. Re:Canonical Failed? by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      At what point is Ubuntu going to transition into a community driven OS?

      I'd say it already is transitioning to a community-driven setup, called "Mint". One of the key things that makes the open-source world different from the commercial world is that when an organization starts getting stupid and greedy, someone forks the project, and if they do a better job the user-base just switches to the new project and loses nothing of any great value.

      Interestingly, this is a plot element of Corey Doctorow's post-singularity / post-scarcity sci-fi story "Down and out in the Magic Kingdom". Except, when applied to real world's finite assets -- instead of infinitely reproducible information -- the user-base can lose things; The above story explores who should be responsible for selecting what the people choose to gain or lose. In the case of Ubuntu users, they risk their unfractured community at minimum. In Doctorow's story the people would avoid this type of breakage by "hostile" takeover of Canonical by more community focused developers instead of forking the mindshare of Ubuntu.

    3. Re:Canonical Failed? by enter+to+exit · · Score: 1

      Another added incentive to the idea of the user tactically pushing Canonical (and Shuttleworth) aside is "The Ubuntu Foundation", A $10 million dollar commitment Shuttleworth put aside as an "emergency fund" in the event that Canonical's involvement in the Ubuntu project ends.

    4. Re:Canonical Failed? by Burz · · Score: 1

      I think this Ubuntu UI criticism is overblown. In my experienced and not-so-humble opinion, they've made 2 real mistakes with the UI... the integrated Amazon search and the total lack of any neat and well-organized launcher (the search panel results are very noisy even with the online component gone). Uninstalling the shopping search extension and adding the 'classicmenu' package rectifies these problems.

      Canonical are trying to adopt Apple's UI features, but also trying here and there to be 'different'. The search-bar-replacing-all-else is one of those different things, but the rest of the UI changes feel decent and being Apple-inspired they ought to.

      By comparison, Fedora usability is a mess and its due mostly to Fedora's abiding get-along-with-upstream-don't-surprise-anyone spirit. That's why Fedora displays your desktop contents to onlookers for 3 seconds when waking from sleep. That's why several Fedora releases wouldn't run the CPU fan on multiple Macbook models, causing them to overheat... because they are about tossing desktop/laptop users the hand-me-downs from the priests of the server world.

      This is representative of the mountains of mis-features Canonical had to work out of the "Linux desktop". As a rule, if Fedora is F-ing up a subsystem or workflow on a PC a switch to Ubuntu usually clears it up. Ubuntu *never* ever overheated my various Macbooks and other laptops... Fedora did it for years. Yes, attention to detail is paid on the RedHat side of their community... but those are server details.

      Beyond that, I don't consider either plain Ubuntu or Fedora to be quite secure but assume Mint would be significantly worse in this area. I prefer the Qubes hypervisor-based desktop for security as it puts the more powerful features of XEN within reach of my mouse.

  24. Re:banksters by Penguinisto · · Score: 2

    If you believe you are safe, think again.

    Oh, it gets worse than that... much, much worse...

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  25. Uh, in English please? Or: mmm, foreign copy-pasta by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Ubuntu developer Oliver Grawert does not prefer to do online banking with Linux Mint.

    "prefers not" would be a less ambiguous way of putting it. But hey, you just copy-pasted the whole thing, it's not like Slashdot expect to you to write summaries in your own words. Oh wait, they totally do.

    One of the Ubuntu developers, Oliver Grawert, originally pointed out that it is not necessary that security updates from Ubuntu get down to Linux Mint users since changes from X.Org, the kernel, Firefox, the boot-loader, and other core components are blocked from being automatically upgraded.

    Err, what? I honestly can't be sure what this means. First, Grawert was already introduced in a previous line of the summary/article. Doing so again is just confusing, but even more so is that it's impossible to tell whether this second sentence, containing as it does the word "originally," is meant to agree or disagree with the idea that Mint is vulnerable.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  26. End of the world? by dshk · · Score: 5, Insightful
    We are talking about a short, almost personal comment on the developer's mailing list of Ubuntu:

    i personally wouldn't do online banking with it ;)

    Compare this with the Slashdot article title:

    Canonical Developer Warns About Banking With Linux Mint

    Whether he is technically right, or not, I find it disgusting that such a side note becomes news on Slashdot.

    By the way, the subject was another new distribution based on Ubuntu, similar to Mint, therefore the Ubuntu developer actually encouraged an Ubuntu derivative.

  27. Re:YearOfTheLinuxDesktop!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because Year of the Linux Desktop went from being a joke to just being sad. Look at what Google accomplished with Linux yet the desktop folks are still bickering and blaming users for the lack of adoption. It is a clear example of where "dogfooding" doesnt work, Microsoft does it too little and the desktop Linux community does it too much, everything seems simple and intuitive when you have spent so much time on it and have a keen interest in it but the average user (90%+ of the target audience) doesn't. That is why this issue with MINT seems like a non-issue to MINT users and developers, they actually understand the perils and benefits of pulling in these updates but an average user does not and this is not clearly communicated to those average users either but by all means continue to just say these users are idiots and move on ignoring them.

  28. Re:YearOfTheLinuxDesktop!!! by amiga3D · · Score: 2

    Face it, Linux isn't for everyone and may never be. So fucking what? It's good for the people that use it. It's been my desktop since 1999 when I finally retired my Amiga 3000. It's the desktop of choice of a lot of people. I've seen the average windows user and guess what? They mostly don't know what they're doing. The overwhelming majority of windows users happily install malware on their computers on a daily basis. That's the desktop we're shooting for in the Linux community? Average users are going to fuck up their systems regardless of what platform they use.

  29. I feel the same way... by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I warn people away from Ubuntu and towards Debian or another reputable distro that is not selling your info and loading your os with AD's and spyware. Yes if you are sending info for targeted ad's you are bundling SPYWARE.

    Ubuntu has tainted the water. It's not a safe OS.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:I feel the same way... by Mirar · · Score: 1

      I run Ubuntu (actually I was trying Mint now, what's the difference again?) because I need support for half a year old hardware.

      It's working so-so anyway, but Debian or Crunchbang just wasn't there at all.

    2. Re:I feel the same way... by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

      I've been warning people away from them ever since leaders stated in early 2010 that they don't give a shit what users want or need -- not exactly a stance that suggests they're likely to stop at anything short of legal ramifications in their pursuit of ways to profit off their users.

      --
      Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
    3. Re:I feel the same way... by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      You can avoid the "selling of information" in Ubuntu by either not using Unity (who would use it anyway?) or by sudo apt-get remove unity-lens-shopping. It's not so hard. Ubuntu has its advantages: software is very easy to come by and the support community is great. I use it because it gets out of the way I can just get on my with my work without any screwing around.

  30. Yes you should only bank on Ubuntu by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    Where Amazon can watch you and tailor ad's based on your balance

  31. Mint runs xhost + by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mint has no security. They intentionally run with access control disabled on the X server (xhost +). Keyloggers and screen scrapers are trivial in this case. Bugs have been filed about this, but Mint considers it working as designed.

    1. Re:Mint runs xhost + by Burz · · Score: 1

      Mint has no security. They intentionally run with access control disabled on the X server (xhost +). Keyloggers and screen scrapers are trivial in this case. Bugs have been filed about this, but Mint considers it working as designed.

      Now that is interesting.

    2. Re:Mint runs xhost + by Burz · · Score: 1

      I disagree *completely*. No PC users are trying any Linux distros in large numbers these days-- that was almost a decade ago and in that time the curious ones have learned to be wary of anything termed "Linux" aimed at their desktop.

      Although I have long bemoaned the lack of usability (which is not the same thing as gloss) in most Linux distros, Mint and the rest are about a ten-thousand miles away from being palatable to normal personal computer users. Linux distros simply lack the structure and consistency needed to make users and app developers feel at home.

      Furthermore, newbies are exactly the sort of people who need the most security in their OS (I hope Qubes will someday shed enough of its distro-like encumbrances to be a contender for average folk-- maybe in another year) and there is nothing controlled about the collision between a naive user and an insecure OS on a hostile network-- its reckless.

      A real solution would be to either accept the conventional Xhost restrictions or do what Apple did (and Canonical are currently doing) and dump X11 for a decent post-1980s graphics architecture... or use special VMs to prevent exploits from taking over the system as Qubes does.

      PS - I also hated Unity for some time because of one thing: The Dash. Installing the 'classicmenu' took care of that, so in my view Canonical's real failing here can be remedied in 15 seconds; they really ought to alert users that this is an option. The other thing that has bothered me is the Amazon search thing and the remedy to this is a lot more obvious, so its not quite a bad situation. Other than that, the changes in Ubuntu are Apple-like and seem quite acceptable (even great) as they are.

  32. Well, by DCFusor · · Score: 2

    It might not solve all issues, after all, it's not like Ubuntu itself is never hacked. But my solution is to run the Mate desktop over Ubuntu 12.04 LTS and get the best of both. It works great, and avoids the crap that is unity, gnome3, you name it - it's like having a stable version of gnome2 that actually works right. I agree with the commentors on many of the other issues. Unity is crap on a multi monitor desktop. It has built-in surveilance on you for crying out loud, huge icons if you've got 4 24" monitors, that you can't move. I like to be able to put the tic-tac-toe buttons where I wish, I like menu and task bars I can autohide, and put on the monitor I want. I paid for every single pixel on them - don't tell me what I can have on my screen or where I can put it. It's not like I don't have other options. Cannonical really stuck its head up its butt in a number of ways of late - and when told so, they said it was our fault for not liking their stupid ideas, which were and are genuinely stupid. Too bad, otherwise they were the good stuff. But they are not alone. Somone figured out that most computers hit the dumpster with the same opsys they shipped with. Since PC sales are falling (the ones out there are all good enough by now anyway, why buy a new one is a good question for most users) - they decided on a "one size fits all" for PCs and mobes. Stupid idea - I have both and use them for different stuff and at different levels of security for that different stuff. It seems the current crop of programmers is too stupid to put in a single boolean - true if PC, false if mobe, or vice versa, and do the rest of the install based on that. Even if my quad monitor setup was reachable by anything but my extended legs and was touch enabled, I'd think this current bunch of Ubuntu stuff was crap for it, what I have is far better, and a lot more usable. It might work out on my nexus, only it's better the way it is already, than unity would make it. They really jumped the shark on this - in company, but still....

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
  33. The NSA is a contributor to Linux ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Not really. Linux is still the least likely OS to contain backdoors and the most likely community to find and out them.

    Linus is not even in the top 100 kernel contributors these days so his opinion on the matter is questionable.

    The NSA is a contributor to Linux.
    "The United States National Security Agency (NSA), the original primary developer of SELinux, released the first version to the open source development community under the GNU GPL on December 22, 2000.[3] The software merged into the mainline Linux kernel 2.6.0-test3, released on 8 August 2003 ... NSA Security-enhanced Linux is a set of patches to the Linux kernel and some utilities to incorporate a strong, flexible mandatory access control (MAC) architecture into the major subsystems of the kernel."

    OpenBSD, which has multiple people involved in periodic security audits of existing code, would be the operating system less likely. It is a myth that many users means many eyeballs looking for exploits and bugs.

    1. Re:The NSA is a contributor to Linux ... by Teun · · Score: 1

      Linus is the last hurdle you have to take to get something committed, he is still the main coordinator.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    2. Re:The NSA is a contributor to Linux ... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      And yet SELinux went in. And if you look at the last decade of CVEs for the Linux kernel, see how many come with the note 'Does not affect users not using SELinux'. A great many of them were in the null pointer dereference checker, and were an entire category of exploit that was unknown until the NSA contributed SELinux. But, sure, go on believing that Linus keeps you safe from the NSA if that makes you happy.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:The NSA is a contributor to Linux ... by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      A great many of them were in the null pointer dereference checker, and were an entire category of exploit that was unknown until the NSA contributed SELinux

      Unknown? No, that's Hyperbole and FUD. Less common maybe.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
  34. Re:Linux politics by Pav · · Score: 1

    I don't know which community you belonged to but flamewars have happened from the beginning eg. Linus vs Tanenbaum, and before Linux there was GNU. You WANT these flamewars to happen because these guys DO things, especially to prove a point. If this issue proves to be a genuine security concern in some cases then expect the argument to end with an improvement of the software you use.

  35. ...and now it becomes about Linux in general. by Mirar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    By inferring that Linux in any form or shape might be not worthy of "online banking",
    I think this has hurt Linux an immense amount.

    He probably just now blocked tens of thousands of people of trying *Canonical*,
    because the article reads "*Linux* is not good to do online banking with".

    Smooth.

    I wonder if he can do anything to repair the damage. :(

    1. Re:...and now it becomes about Linux in general. by stub667 · · Score: 1

      Really? A brief response made on Linux *developers* mailing list hurts Linux an immense amount?

      If you want to see who is hurting Linux, look at who is publishing this click bait garbage.

    2. Re:...and now it becomes about Linux in general. by Mirar · · Score: 1

      I hope it stays there. If it does, all is, if not well, at least ok.

      It reached slashdot (and not as "some developers quibble over who has the best practices")
      -- it might reach all kinds of tech news.

  36. Re:like they needed more ammo by Mirar · · Score: 2

    Everyone versus Linux. That's the ammunition he gave out for everyone outside the Linux world.

  37. +1 Insightful by Burz · · Score: 1

    Because Year of the Linux Desktop went from being a joke to just being sad. Look at what Google accomplished with Linux yet the desktop folks are still bickering and blaming users for the lack of adoption. It is a clear example of where "dogfooding" doesnt work, Microsoft does it too little and the desktop Linux community does it too much, everything seems simple and intuitive when you have spent so much time on it and have a keen interest in it but the average user (90%+ of the target audience) doesn't. That is why this issue with MINT seems like a non-issue to MINT users and developers, they actually understand the perils and benefits of pulling in these updates but an average user does not and this is not clearly communicated to those average users either but by all means continue to just say these users are idiots and move on ignoring them.

    There is too much navel-gazing attitude in the community, and that tends to produce stuff that only looks friendly to Unix greybeards and those who want to emulate their elitism. Ubuntu has distanced itself somewhat from that unhealthy dynamic, but IMO they are still missing certain ingredients for a successful desktop OS. I think Elementary OS also deserves a mention because although its based on GNU/Linux, they publicly renounce any status as another "Linux distro" or close association with that subculture... they do not live to be cozy with "upstream" as doing so ensures that whatever you publish will be the product of a consortium of tech committees.

  38. Check out 'Qubes' hypervisor-based desktop by Burz · · Score: 1

    Its the only OS that I'd trust to do online banking these days; BSD jails are flimsy compared to Qubes' XEN domains.

    I'd also assume that any OS outfit offering "security" that doesn't have security researchers at its core is handing out a load of jive, especially if their system relies on a traditional kernel for said security.

    1. Re:Check out 'Qubes' hypervisor-based desktop by Burz · · Score: 1

      Um, getting attacked by the banking site hardly counts as an effective exploit, and one doesn't use a banking vm with other sites.

      The point of Qubes' UI is to make domain traversal trivial for the user and impossible for anyone else.

    2. Re:Check out 'Qubes' hypervisor-based desktop by Burz · · Score: 1

      I think the last thing Apple would want is to have OS X equated/synonymous with FreeBSD. Linux cliques pale in comparison to the gulf of separation there.

      I enjoy using OS X, too. But I've minimized what I do on it because of Apple's collusion with the NSA.

  39. When exactly they gonna close this "Ubuntu" thing? by lagi · · Score: 1

    I will admit it was nice try at first ... but now it's just a pile of commercial crap floating around the Internet.
    I urge the GNU/Linux community send it to the recycling plant.

  40. Re:Linux politics by TheSeatOfMyPants · · Score: 1

    Iknow where you're coming from, but the problem isn't the Linux community -- it's squarely with Canonical, Shuttleworth, and the fans they've taught their attitude to. If you ignore them and just pay attention to the community-oriented distro teams/developers, you'll find that they haven't really changed.

    I came to Linux because it's a worldwide community of people driven by their talents to work together and create something great & beneficial; as you said, no politics, big egos or childish bullshit. In the big window-button fiasco 2 years after I started using it, the Ubuntu leadership (echoed by fanboys) openly said they didn't give a shit what the users wanted or needed, and even mild criticism at the forums was leading to bans. Worse, after an update fucked up my install, I decided to try a live CD for another distro and discovered that the "all other distros are too user-unfriendly for regular users"was a load of FUD lies; they were willing to drive Linux users to Windows as long as it kept us from their "competitors"!

    I almost gave up on Linux at that moment just because, like you, I assumed that the whole community must be like Canonical/Ubuntu. Luckily the live CD pointed me to Fedora's site, which had an area dedicated to showing users how we could use all different kinds of talents to help out & participate (making me feel wanted & useful) plus a forum full of people being honest without repercussions, and visiting the sites for other distros like OpenSuSE or SimplyMEPISshowed the same thing. I hope you'll be able to find a similar haven and enjoy the good parts of the community.

    --
    Now mostly at Usenet:comp.misc & SoylentNews.org (it's made of people!)
  41. I had 6 months long kernel root exploit on my mint by Gunstick · · Score: 1

    That's why I mostly stay away from mint
    Last year there was a linux root exploit in the kernel. I tried the exploit and it worked: bang root shell!
    So I waited to see when this would be fixed via the usual upgrade path... nothing happened during 6 months.
    Until I finally wanted to use my system and so I looked into the reasons why I'm still vulnerable while all other distributions are ok.
    So I need to run apt-get to get a new kernel! That's not "ready for the desktop".

    Come on! All distributions are so proud to always say that fixes get quickly spread and there comes mint saying: "I won't even notify the end user that he should upgrade his X or kernel because it is vulnerable". That's dumb. Mint is wrong, Ubuntu is right.
    Result: I don't like Ubuntu, I don't like Mint. Is there a Mint derivative which does it correctly or do I need to go with Apple?

    --
    Atari rules... ermm... ruled.
  42. Mint's problem by stooo · · Score: 1

    Mint is a security problem in itself.
    It takes ubuntu, and strips it from upgrade, strips it from some updates, fro broken reasons.
    Why break functionnality insted of making the right thing, which would be to limit it by default, for example.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  43. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  44. Re:Because We Don't Trust Ubuntu by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

    I've been using Mint for about a year now, through 13 and 15. I love how it 'just works' out of the box, but I'm switching back to SuSE today. It takes a little time to configure, but I've never had any trouble with past versions

  45. Re:Linux politics by readacc · · Score: 1

    Heck no, you don't want these flamewars to happen. What you really want is a respectable level of discourse between the participants. Flamewars are called that because it's all about flaming and not getting to the actual truth about the matter - and for an outsider looking into the discussion, all they see is insults and fanboyism and it gets very hard to know the facts and whether they're actual facts or spin.

    Flamewars can be addictive I suppose, but they're the lowest form of "discussion" you can have and aren't productive.

  46. Re:Chromebook for Banking by vandamme · · Score: 1

    And Google would never, never, sell your information? Not like that dastardly Canonical, or that awful Mint that just gives it away.