Slashdot Mirror


Vulnerability Discovered In Latest Ubuntu Distributions, Users Advised To Update (ubuntu.com)

Celarent Darii writes: There is a vulnerability in the latest ubuntu distributions due to the DNS resolver included in systemd. The inclusion of the dns resolver was lamented by many on the mailing list, not without cause. All are advised to update their distribution.

159 comments

  1. Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Millions of Windows machines got hit yesterday with NotPetya, so this DNS vulnerability is proof that Linux is just as insecure because millions of Linux machines... didn't.

  2. what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I had nothing but issues and uninstalled it and went back to dnsmasq... not a problem since. I wish they would just quit throwing the kitchen, bathroom, outside sinks into this mess.

    1. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you run a DNS server on your box or what do you need dnsmasq for? Just put the line 'nameserver ' in your /etc/resolv.conf (or wherever the its contents are copied from) and be done with it. That's how it looks here on my 14.04 box.

      The DNS server (dnsmasq) is running on the router.

    2. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      forwards all dns queries to my router. This is not how 17.04 and later works. I could not resolve half of the net and none of my lan. 14.04 is not affected. But if you load 17.04 or later, then you have to deal with this atrocity.

    3. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who had the bright idea to add a service for something that just worked before by adding the right entry to /etc/resolv.conf?

    4. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What problem do the systemd guys think that they're solving by adding a half-assed dns resolver to systemd? Is it just because they can't stand to have any software that's not under their direct control?

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    5. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dnsmasq hands out A records for machines that have obtained an IPv4 address with DHCP. It's a DHCP server in addition to DNS. I believe it can also act as a WINS server, but fuck Windows.

      Yes, I'm fully aware that I could edit my hosts file every time I attach a new device to my network.

    6. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hossssssst filessssss... Preciousssssssss....

    7. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have one dnsmasq instance running on my router that handles my LAN, why would I need another dnsmasq instance on every other system?

    8. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is it just because they can't stand to have any software that's not under their direct control?

      Systemd is an underhand way to demolish the usability of Linux, like when Nokia was bought by MS.

    9. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much. They're so deep into "Not Invented Here" territory that they refuse to even look at the list of common DNS exploits that other resolvers fixed years ago, and are determined to invent those bugs over again from scratch.

      I'm avoiding it as much as possible until they finally get to a stable 1.0 release where I can confidently upgrade it without worrying about what other applications are going to break on contact without whatever workarounds. Looks like they're on 0.233 now, so it will probably be a while.

    10. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by ordinal · · Score: 1

      Really half assed - I changed to dnsmasq then changed distro because of the mess DNS is in 17.04 - worst Ubuntu release since switching from Redhat to Ubuntu about 10 years ago and all down to this single issue (and tbh one of the worst issues of breakage of something that previously worked I've seen in nearly 25 years of linux experience).

      Changing one of the most critical subsystems seems to have been done with little testing (esp home use not with corporate dns) and lack of attention to bug reports during beta and post release.

    11. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by gweihir · · Score: 0

      I believe it is that they have by now gotten away with so many bad decisions, crappy design and broken implementation, that they think they cannot be touched. Considering the extreme stupidity evident in the adoption of systemd as main init system in many distros, they have a point.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by najajomo · · Score: 1

      "I believe it is that they have by now gotten away with so many bad decisions"

      Such as embedding the Google DNS addresses into the make file of the SystemD compile script - yea really. Have these people any idea of the security implications of embedding a fixed IP address into the DNS resolver. For instance disabling the local DNS server, blocking 8.8.8.8 and firing up your own box at 8.8.8.8. What F*****G genius thought of this particular hack. "This setting is hence only used if no other DNS server information is known" ref. If no DNS information is known then that should really mean that no DNS information is known.

    13. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hushhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Gollum, APK might hear you and post his host file engine again.

    14. Re:what a horrible dns resolver by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Fascinating. It really does not get much more clueless than this.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  3. I'm amazed! by Vlijmen+Fileer · · Score: 3, Funny

    No kidding. Do all of you folks see my amazed look? :/
    B.t.w. does anybody know if systemd already ships its own OS?

    1. Re:I'm amazed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but I'm totally blindsided that they fixed something.

    2. Re:I'm amazed! by Type44Q · · Score: 4, Informative

      SystemD's OS is the Intel Management Engine.

    3. Re:I'm amazed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never spell systemd in camel case! It's giving me penis envy!

    4. Re:I'm amazed! by HelpTheNewOverlord · · Score: 1

      If this bug is present only in Ubuntu, it seems to me that the problem is not in systemd. Can anyone explain to me why it doesn't affect RedHat?

    5. Re: I'm amazed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Although systemd is developed by a clique of Redhat engineers, Redhat distros themselves are so laughably out of date it's likely we will see them suffer from this vulnerability, just in 5 years time.

  4. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Finally, the proof! When we arrest Linus, should it be the death sentence or just prison for life?

  5. Poettering strikes again by guruevi · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think systemd is a Microsoft plant. It's basically INI files for Linux. Next week he'll upgrade us all to a 'central registry' and you'll need a GUI to edit it.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Poettering strikes again by F.Ultra · · Score: 2

      Because let's pretend that INI files have not been in wide use on Unix for decades?

    2. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is nothing wrong with using INI Files.

    3. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they are text configuration files. INI-Files have this pointless '[section]' thrown in.

    4. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If AIX ever had a systemd version ported to it, the universe would instantly transition into the heat death phase.

    5. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Poettering is a Microsoft plant. Whatever Red Hat pays him I'm sure MS secretly pays him 10x more.

    6. Re:Poettering strikes again by F.Ultra · · Score: 3, Informative

      Some are yes, other are complex turing complete and others follow the INI style. Look i.e at /etc/openal/alsoft.conf, /etc/subversion/config, /etc/couchdb/local.ini, or why not any of the .desktop files in /usr/share/applications/.

      INI style are not bad just because MS happened to use them a lot in MS-DOS, AFAIK there isn't even anything that points to MS being the inventors of the format, just that they used them system until they came up with their horrid registry.

    7. Re:Poettering strikes again by F.Ultra · · Score: 2

      If AIX would destroy the universe as we know it if there ever was a single INI style file stored on it then it would have done so decades ago.

    8. Re:Poettering strikes again by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I see configuration files with [section] breaks all the time under GNU/Linux. What are you looking at that doesn't? gconf XML files? ;-)

      I rather like .ini files, they work, they're easy to navigate, and they're human readable, unlike XML.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    9. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but unless you're stupid enough to reuse keywords, you don't need the '[section]' tags and the INI-File becomes a simple text config file.

      It looks like systemd insists on the '[section]' tags despite not reusing keywords. What were they smoking?

    10. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      INI style are not bad just because MS happened to use them a lot in MS-DOS, AFAIK there isn't even anything that points to MS being the inventors of the format, just that they used them system until they came up with their horrid registry.

      Just thinking out loud here. If INI style files become the Linux standard, or at the very least, Linux becomes dependent on INI style files to operate, what happens when MicroSoft decides to open the lawsuit of the century claiming to be the owners of the INI format and demand retribution? It's not like they haven't dragged questionable standards into the courts in the past. They don't care if they win or lose (what's money to MicroSoft?), they just need a toe in the door to drag the FUD through the mud for years and send the growing Linux market back into your mother's basement.

    11. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The '[section]' tags are unnecessary though. Why have them?

    12. Re:Poettering strikes again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    13. Re:Poettering strikes again by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      Go look at x.conf - multiple sections. Try running it without.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
    14. Re:Poettering strikes again by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      They're what tell you that you're looking at an INI file.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    15. Re:Poettering strikes again by ssam · · Score: 2

      >what happens when MicroSoft decides to open the lawsuit of the century claiming to be the owners of the INI format and demand retribution? I think they get laughed out of court.

    16. Re:Poettering strikes again by najajomo · · Score: 1

      This following is a reconstruction of what actually took place:

      Poettering: Dbus should move to SystemD.

      Dbus developers: How do we get Dbus working under SystemD?

      Poettering: That's low level stuff, we don't have the skills, besides that's not my problem.
      --

      See also what SystemD does to /etc/hostname. There are now three different hostnames: static, pretty and transient. ref Again it's a curious decision and understanding the logic behind it fails me.

    17. Re:Poettering strikes again by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      I guess you only use global variables as well.

  6. And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is why Windows 10 is superior to lunix.

    *smug and cruel laughter*

    HahahahheeeeehheeeehawwwHHEEEEEEHAWWWWHEEEEEEHAWWWW

    1. Re:And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NotPetya would like to disagree with your statement.

    2. Re:And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Without a link or a reference of any kind, that's like saying "HamBurguhlur would like to disagree with your statement." Am I supposed to just magically know what you are talking about?

    3. Re: And... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is the fucking malware that's been spreading and has atleast 3 posts on the front pages of slashdot the past couple days.

      Do you live in a cave?

  7. Immediate upgrade recommended by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Suggest Windows 8 or Windows 10 for maximum support

  8. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Type44Q · · Score: 2

    Windows for life.

  9. SystemD is a computer virus by fubarrr · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    SystemD is a computer virus

    1. Re:SystemD is a computer virus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have seen many trolls in my lifetime, but I don't think I've ever seen one as sad and pathetic as this.

    2. Re:SystemD is a computer virus by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

      I have seen many trolls in my lifetime, but I don't think I've ever seen one as sad and pathetic as this.

      You must be new here.

      --
      "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  10. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the fact that linux machines didn't get hit by an attack crafted specifically for windows proves "Linux is more secure" I hope to god you aren't a sysadmin, you are worse than the unpatched windows servers in my network. At least I fully understand the risk associated with those boxes and I'm not living in a fantasy world of "Linux is more secure"

    It's as secure as it's admin, and clearly from here and many linux forums, most of the admins are too busy smelling their own farts to be bothered with actual security.

    But,.... this is ubuntu, who the fuck cares about ubuntu? desktop users.

  11. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prison where he can become Jamal's girlfriend like the good little beta he is.

  12. At least for 14.04, the article is full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Too many people lie to hurt Linux because they're corporate shill or just simply hate freedom. The newest version of systemd that we make available for 14.40 is 229-4ubuntu17. This idiot lies and claims that 231-9ubuntu5 fixes the problem. That version does not exist. The attacks from people like Oracle and Microsoft are getting more desperate. Their constant spew of hate must be working because they're investing more money in paying these people to spew more lies.

    1. Re:At least for 14.04, the article is full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The title just says the "latest Ubuntu distributions". Is 16.04 the latest version of Ubuntu? And the linked article is a security notice on ubuntu.com a website owned and controlled by Canonical the company behind Ubuntu.

      What the fuck is your rant about?

    2. Re:At least for 14.04, the article is full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since when is a 3yo LTS considered part of the 'latest Ubuntu Distributions' ?

      You say 231-9ubuntu5 doesn't exist?

      What is this: https://packages.ubuntu.com/yakkety/systemd

      There's even a 232-21ubuntu5 in Zesty and 233-8ubuntu1 in Artful.

    3. Re:At least for 14.04, the article is full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uhm, 14.04 is an old release. From April 2014. You also don't address whether the bug fix has been backported to 14.04.

      Ubuntu 16.10 and later (non-LTS releases) have 231-9ubuntu5 or later.
      https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=systemd

  13. Terrible summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love how this post doesn't make the slightest attempt at summarizing the story and consists solely of blatant (and erroneous) editorializing. Somehow, a piece of software containing a vulnerability is now proof that it's terrible and irredeemable. The fact that the vulnerability is not given even the briefest of descriptions in this summary demonstrates this post is about scoring political points and literally nothing more.

    "All are advised to update their distribution." This is what package managers are for. Stop with the disingenuous suggestion that some special action must be taken.

    1. Re: Terrible summary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the piece of software (SystemD) is constantly breaking things that worked and opens up vulnerabilities that aren't there. I find something it breaks all the time. Go fan boy for that garbage somewhere else.

  14. Who the hell let the PulseAudio dev near init? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    PulseAudio is a flaky disaster as is the developer behind it. But systemd is scaled up full retard. Who, in their right mind, thinks, "Gee, I should plop my own homegrown DNS resolver into my system service startup tool. Nothing could go wrong with that." Let's forget that BIND went through many painful years of vulnerability management.

    1. Re:Who the hell let the PulseAudio dev near init? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Meh. I know you're trolling, but I'm bored and feel like rambling.

      I'd avoided PulseAudio for the longest time. I had like over a second of lag for anything I played through it. Nothing I could do to fix it. That was back when we had to use something because OSS would only let one process play sound at a time (unless your card had multiple DSPs) and for most of us that was aRts or ESD. Then ALSA came along with dmix and all was good.

      (I've also used JACK, mostly as an effects box for guitar, but if you just want to play sounds from multiple application to one audio sink, using JACK is like deciding you want to destroy an ant hill and using a nuke.)

      Well, I found out it could be better. The roommate gave me a demo of PulseAudio running on her system, and I was flabbergasted. It was more capable than Windows 7. Which, I mean, come on. Don't be a dipshit. Windows 7's mixer does a lot of nice stuff like shunting audio between different sinks in real time and per-application volume adjustment. I don't like Windows, but I'm at least a big enough of a man to admit when M$ does something decent.

      So yeah, I removed PulseAudio from my "Lennart" section in my /etc/portage/package.mask, turned on the use flag globally, recompiled, and now everything "just works." I even threw out the .asoundrc I'd cooked up since PulseAudio does it all for me now.

      Somebody told me a while back that Lennart hasn't touched PulseAudio in a while, so that's probably why. NetworkManager is still a pile of shit. You might have noticed I'm a Gentoo user up there, and I'm very happy with OpenRC. Fuck systemd.

    2. Re:Who the hell let the PulseAudio dev near init? by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Incompetence coupled with extreme arrogance. The same old story all over again, although the morons that decided that systemd is ready for mainstream usage are the truly "special" ones here. There are a lot of incompetent coders out there and the Poettering-cabal was _known_ to be incompetent before, but instead of simply ignoring this broken mess and the cretins behind it, they had to make it the default init-system and apparently now default everything else.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  15. Systemd again??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Systemd is just a piece of crap. It's slow, bloated, broken, and a security hole waiting to be exploited. I propose that all linux distros revert back to init.d and dispose of this garbage code at a microsoft coding camp.

  16. LTS ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and the people who are smart and only run LTS releases were not affected...

  17. Dare I say it? by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here goes: systemd, the cause of all modern Linux problems.

    systemd is completely backward in how unix systems are built. You're supposed to have tiny programs do one job and do it well. systemd is a huge monolith that's assimilating everything on its path.

    Wait, why does that sound familiar?

    Anyone know if the authors of systemd are getting paid by Microsoft, by any chance?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
    1. Re:Dare I say it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The grand irony here is at the same time MS is going in the opposite direction. Many things in Windows are now being handled by " tiny programs do one job and do it well".

      Reconfiguring Windows Server via the fancy GUI? It is quite literally a front-end to a bunch of Powershell commands, I shit you not.

    2. Re:Dare I say it? by Kjella · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm not saying that systemd is the answer, but... the old init system worked great if all you ever needed was an init system. That is to say your machine got everything plugged in on boot, always on a wired network and always on AC. The only thing you need the init system for was to get you from cold hardware to a running state, then it could declare "my work here is done" and go into retirement until it was time for shutdown. For some people that's all they need, good for you. Anything dynamic has been a mess. Suspend/resume/hibernate, hot-plugging/unplugging, wired/wireless, connected/not connected to network, AC/battery, power management, docked/undocked, switchable graphics, the list goes on and on.

      The track record is not much better when it comes to shared resources like window managers, composited desktops, sound cards etc. that need some kind of mediator like a compositor or sound server. You can of course say that every application should solve this on their own, but the truth is that we know they don't and there's a huge patchwork of solutions that try to make applications play nice, often competing so this application will only work with that system-level service. I can understand that you don't want to support two init systems (SysV, systemd), four sound servers (PulseAudio, ALSA, Jack, OSS), two window managers (X11, Wayland) and so on.

      For this you want a modern POSIX, call it an "application execution environment" if you will. A running mediator between the applications and their surroundings, not just at boot but as long as the machine has power. Maybe this could be solved by a hundred small services of various kinds or at least that's its a better solution than one gigantic mess. But to pretend it's all working great is something of an exaggeration, to say the least.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:Dare I say it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, why does that sound familiar?

      Because many programs of value that run on Open Source follow that model? Like the entire graphical engine?

      Fortunately I'm thankful that Linux != Unix. It makes all the "it doesn't follow Unix philosophy" quite lame. Sad!

    4. Re:Dare I say it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not saying that systemd is the answer, but... the old init system worked great if all you ever needed was an init system. That is to say your machine got everything plugged in on boot, always on a wired network and always on AC. The only thing you need the init system for was to get you from cold hardware to a running state, then it could declare "my work here is done" and go into retirement until it was time for shutdown. For some people that's all they need, good for you.

      For servers that's ALL you need. I can see where systemd solves many problems for laptops flitting from network to network. But where servers are involved all people require a stable static environment that doesn't change, even as power and networks are fail around them. Dynamic changes on a server are an invitation to late night callouts and out of control overtime costs. The old init system is superior in every way on servers, warts and all.

    5. Re:Dare I say it? by chihowa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem with systemd is the half-assed assimilation of more and more system functions.

      • Why does systemd even have its own DNS resolver?
      • How many people are working on it and reviewing the code for security issues?
      • Why was the whole thing rewritten from scratch instead of just writing a shim for the previously used, reviewed, secure resolvers that exist?

      It's not just DNS resolvers, either. I've had issues with systemd's own (very incomplete) SNTP client, which is used instead of more mature and robust clients. Why do they keep reinventing the wheel in such a sloppy way?

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    6. Re:Dare I say it? by rainer_d · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that systemd is the answer, but... the old init system worked great if all you ever needed was an init system. That is to say your machine got everything plugged in on boot, always on a wired network and always on AC. The only thing you need the init system for was to get you from cold hardware to a running state, then it could declare "my work here is done" and go into retirement until it was time for shutdown. For some people that's all they need, good for you. Anything dynamic has been a mess. Suspend/resume/hibernate, hot-plugging/unplugging, wired/wireless, connected/not connected to network, AC/battery, power management, docked/undocked, switchable graphics, the list goes on and on.

      I don't need all of that.

      When I want a working implementation of that, I just buy a MacBook and run macOS.

      Or run Windows, which also exists.

      I just need a server that doesn't shit itself between patch-runs, reboots and that doesn't f' up things that worked quite well for a decade (and continue to work quite well on OSs that didn't let an amateur design such a thing (which incidentally is also how Mac OS X got it right: they got people from NeXT and the guy who co-founded the FreeBSD project to head their Unix-y base for a decade)).

      --
      Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
    7. Re:Dare I say it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SNTP is broken by design, and should never have been used for anything important. RFC4330 states that it has "accuracy and reliability expectations similar to the UDP/TIME protocol described in RFC 868." RFC868 is literally two pages long and is essentially "client sends packet to server, server sends packet containing current number of seconds since epoch, client sets time."

      Naturally Pottering's excuse for all of this shit is that distributions should not just package whatever shit he crapped out.

    8. Re:Dare I say it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you just... use systemd (the "two init systems" and so on argument) as a justification... for systemd. Dear Lord, that is as convoluted as systemd itself. Libraries is how consistency between applications is handled in an nicer OS like macOS. Much better than this blob running as mediator all the time.

    9. Re:Dare I say it? by epine · · Score: 1

      Your entire post is a paean for a two-track solution: a sane, modular solution for servers (already extant), and a convenience solution for mobile devices (if under "convenience" one accepts that some, or many, or most reboots might not be optional).

      Slashdot is precisely that forum which caters first of all to the former group.

      In 1999, the Japanese firm NTT DoCoMo released the first smartphones to achieve mass adoption within a country. Smartphones became widespread in the late 2000s.

      Yeah? Slashdot was founded in 1997. All the better to shit on 1998, and much else from the same "a quick reboot will fix it (for a while)" family tree.

    10. Re:Dare I say it? by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      You're supposed to have tiny programs do one job and do it well.

      emacs would like to have a word with you.

  18. What else will I get with the update? by damn_registrars · · Score: 1
    Some time ago I upgraded from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 LTS. Along the way I got some great new features, including:
    • A new version of CUPS that randomly crashes without warning or logging
    • A power management system that locks configuration files pertaining to my display settings whenever I put my laptop to sleep
    • Random obliteration of my .bash_history file

    What else can I look forward to if I download this update?

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:What else will I get with the update? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your network device(s) will be renamed.

    2. Re:What else will I get with the update? by fisted · · Score: 1

      Yep, and finally their names will be predictable(*)

      (*) Predictable for software(**), not for humans.

      (**) Provided the software knows all sorts of details, like, where exactly on what bus the NIC is attached, and so on(***).

      (***) i.e. essentially unpredictable(****) for software and for humans.

      (****) But we refer to it as "predictable(TM)" anyway.

  19. Oh internet, you so funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Comments in this post are part of a huge circle-jerk, few sane aside.

  20. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Walter+White · · Score: 1

    Guess again. Ubuntu is the most popular Linux server distro.

    http://www.serverwatch.com/col...

  21. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Won't get that past the 8th amendment.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  22. For those keeping track... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2, Funny
    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:For those keeping track... by thegarbz · · Score: 0, Troll

      Going for funny but lacking the insightful part. Systemd is still massively growing in use meaning the number of people available to discover issues is ever increasing as will the infant bugs. It is not yet "mature" and probably the biggest valid complaint is how many distros shipped it so early.

      That graph is the infant graph of every project. The only things that are different is the scales, but then unless you've worked on a massive multi-year piece of software you wouldn't recognise it.

      They need help.
      What are YOU doing to help them? There's 617 things you could be working on.

    2. Re:For those keeping track... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That graph is the infant graph of every project

      Sure... except that systemd has been around for seven years. It's not maturing because it's always expanding.

      They need help.

      I agree, they are rudderless boat that runs into other projects and absorbs them. What they need is vision but the project leaders are blind mice in a maze with no finish line. I cannot help them because they will not accept one of their ideas being rejected.

      What are YOU doing to help them? There's 617 things you could be working on.

      I've been writing a properly designed replacement to dislodge systemd. It's portable, superior but most importantly it follows the UNIX design philosophy. However, I will not be an enabler of those who work on systemd by cleaning up their messes for the next 30 years.

      Open source software is evolutionary and systemd too will go the way of the dinosaurs.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    3. Re:For those keeping track... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      We have the most issues! Other projects cannot compete, so sad.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    4. Re:For those keeping track... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I will certainly not help a project that was fundamentally broken from the start, because its main developers are known incompetents with bad personalities that do not understand the Unix-philosophy at all. If I want to run something made by clueless morons, I just boot Windows, no need to replicate the same lack of understanding on Linux.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    5. Re:For those keeping track... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      That graph is the infant graph of every project

      Sure... except that systemd has been around for seven years. It's not maturing because it's always expanding.

      And that is just it: They are making one of the worst beginners mistakes. And that they are still beginners after 7 years shows that there is something fundamentally wrong with them. The usual explanation is incompetence coupled with arrogance, and it does seem to fit well here. The incompetence makes them beginners and the arrogance prevents them from learning. In addition, they are also uneducated, as Brooks described the things they are doing wrong about 40 years ago.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:For those keeping track... by CRC'99 · · Score: 1

      That graph is the infant graph of every project

      Sure... except that systemd has been around for seven years. It's not maturing because it's always expanding.

      They even made a game about systemd:

      http://agar.io/

      --
      Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
    7. Re:For those keeping track... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Sure... except that systemd has been around for seven years.

      And it has been in wide circulation for less than 3. I see you've never worked on a major piece of software before.

    8. Re:For those keeping track... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And that they are still beginners after 7 years shows that there is something fundamentally wrong with them.

      Why don't you try and code a fundamental part of an OS that is attempting to manage every other part of the OS, then we'll see how long you take.

    9. Re:For those keeping track... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Yeah. It's fundamentally broken, that's exactly why the technical committees of all major distributions have adopted it. It's just as fundamentally broken as Windows, the OS that runs the entire world.

      Yep they've totally done goofed. How silly of them.

      p.s. You're an idiot.

    10. Re:For those keeping track... by gweihir · · Score: 1

      I do not even need to comment on this. You made it amply clear who the idiot here actually is.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    11. Re:For those keeping track... by gweihir · · Score: 2

      Why would I try to do something _this_ stupid?

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    12. Re:For those keeping track... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      worked on consumer hardware custom OS's, and systemd is fucking idiotic shit.

      Stop drinking the fucking cool aid

    13. Re:For those keeping track... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just because they are on a technical committee does not mean they know shit about how to do systems correctly, more likely they do committee politics, as anyone who is technical hates that fucking shit.

      Anyone who looked at the fucking mess that systemd is and decided that was the best solution are the fucking idiots!.

    14. Re:For those keeping track... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      systemd is essentially political; those who see it in terms of code (like RMS, who does not grasp that software can be free in name only) will never understand it properly — until it is too late.

    15. Re:For those keeping track... by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

      Major or minor is irrelevant. What's relevant here is the design or rather the lack thereof. I could argue the specifics but I don't think you have looked at the code. If you actually want to know more about the design of systemd, here's a basic explanation of how it's core works.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    16. Re:For those keeping track... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I would say they are at least as competent as glibc developers who bring such gems as https://access.redhat.com/articles/2161461. (Oooh, a remotely exploitable bug in DNS resolver code! But without any sandboxing this time.)

      I suggest you stop using glibc right now.

  23. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    fuck beta

  24. /. is pretty predictable by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When I read the story, I immediately thought "Half the comments will be about Petya, the other half will lament how systemd is the spawn of hell".

    I was not disappointed.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  25. Re: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who better to write a major security problem, if not Captain Clueless?

  26. Re:Linux might become as insecure as Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The problem isn't with Linux, it's with systemd. I do use a distro that unfortunately uses systemd. I was actually surprised at how fast systemd infected so many distributions when so many people seemed to complain about it. There seemed to be a lot of arguments over at Debian, so much that a group of those involved left to create a fork of Debian. I haven't had any problems with it yet, but I am wary of it, and how it goes against what Linux is.

  27. News? by sqorbit · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A vulnerability is found, update your system. How is that news? That should just be common practice. When security updates are released for your OS, update it. This is not news. Vulnerabilities are found often in all OSes. And updates are released. Seems to me like the article is attempting to call out Ubuntu rather that actually inform and educate.

    --
    Sent from my TARDIS
    1. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      systemd should be renamed systemREEEEEEE given all the complainers

    2. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's news because it's a vulnerability in a systemd component and Slashdot loves a good systemd story.

    3. Re:News? by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      A vulnerability is found, update your system. How is that news?

      There's three types of vulnerabilities that make the news here:
      1) Windows vulnerabilities - because Slashdot loves a good laugh.
      2) Linux vulnerabilities - because Slashdot loves freaking out.
      3) Systemd vulnerbilities - because Slashdot loves thinking they were right and systemd is evil.

      This is a 2 out of 3. I suspect by the morning there will be 900 comments and the Slashdot mobile interface will rate this as the story with the most interest and activity, ... errr I mean the most ad revenue.

    4. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >A vulnerability is found, update your system. How is that news? That should just be common practice. When security updates are released for your OS, update it. This is not news. Vulnerabilities are found often in all OSes. And updates are released. Seems to me like the article is attempting to call out Ubuntu rather that actually inform and educate.

      Last time I "updated" ubuntu it wiped my entire harddrive, not just the tiny partition it was actually using.

    5. Re:News? by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      the story with the most interest and activity, ... errr I mean the most ad revenue.

      Beat me to it. Systemd articles generate page views. We know this, yet here we are, contributing to the dumpster fire.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  28. Oh well by farlukar · · Score: 1

    I had already swapped systemd-resolved for dnsmasq because that works.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une .sig
    1. Re: Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According the bug list, systems-resolved seems to be causing a lot of problems.

  29. lotta that going around lately by Thud457 · · Score: 1

    the paradigm of the age is "we don't care what the users/customers/voters think, we're doing it anyway".

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:lotta that going around lately by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I miss the age of 'User requests are what computers are for!'

      --
      Good-bye
    2. Re:lotta that going around lately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tron? Is that you?

    3. Re:lotta that going around lately by Vlijmen+Fileer · · Score: 1

      Indeed.
      I have fond memories for example of how Gnome once decided to remake their desktop environment into little more than a wallpaper, and kept it like that, utterly unusable, for what, two years, all in the name of "goodness".
      Arrogant turds.

  30. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This bug affects 17.04 and 16.10, nothing critical should be running on non LTS releases anyway.

  31. What you get for running Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what you get for running that horribly insecure Linux operating system!

  32. Linus doesn't care by Drunkulus · · Score: 1

    Fed up with systemd, Linus switched his home machine to freebsd last year.

  33. Please, do not use systemd by what+about · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Switch to slackware, devuan, gentoo...

    After all Linux is still a few percentage of desktop, no need to install Debian derivative
    We are competent admin, are we not ?

    Yes, it is painful to see such a great distro being overtaken by such a crap software.

    Live long and prosper

    1. Re:Please, do not use systemd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Switch to slackware, devuan, [...] no need to install Debian derivative
      You do realise that Devuan is advertised as systemd-free Debian, right?

  34. Agreed, 110% - "however"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: "Shouting it out from the rooftops", 'spreading the GOOD word' for those who *may* not hear it otherwise = GOOD idea!

    APK

    P.S.=> They're doing the RIGHT thing, by everyone, really (imo @ least) - & me, though I used to do it (the REAL reason I used to come here initially, not for a "MS cheering section" (which I admittedly favor, it's made me a career/life), but rather to SEE HOW THE OTHER 1/2 LIVES & to conquer their 'objections' via facts (especially when BS) - I already KNOW a lot of what MS spouts after all or what they do, good or bad (all relative) - I wanted to see what goes on on a "Pro-*NIX" site & imo? /. 'fits the bill' - very informative. Got me to try Linux again after, oh (1994 1st time, it sucked) 16++ yrs., & while in Europe travelling, I ran it on a laptop for the summer (it's VERY good now, no reason to rib on it - well, I will rib on outright CRAP from its 'troll supporters' to this day though)... apk

    1. Re:Agreed, 110% - "however"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precioussssssssss.....

    2. Re:Agreed, 110% - "however"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason you ever come here is to spam your shitty HostFiles app, just like you've been doing for the last 10 or 15 years. Get a fucking life already.

  35. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    interestingly enough, everyone who argued against systemd has been validated. Systemd is a cancer and should be irradicated from all distributions. Systemd is an active effort to fuck over Linux to be more like Windows. As systemd continues to be used, Linux continues to become as broken, dysfunctional, and unsecure as Windows.

    Only the dumb of the dumb actually champion systemd.

  36. Finally... The year of the Linux Desktop by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

    Finally, we may be seeing the year of the Linux Desktop... ...Malware.

    --
    "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  37. you didnt know what a beta cuck was by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and you didnt use it in your everyday vocabulary until your friends at fox news mind controlled you to use it.

    now youre just a parrot repeater thinking calling someone a beta cuck doesnt make you look like a parrot repeater

    parrot repeater

  38. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait, I thought that you alt-righters were all about LGBT equality. I was getting ready to hate Muslims because of the Pulse nightclub shooting.

    Why would it be shameful to be Jamal's girlfriend?

  39. Already updated, as usual by hackel · · Score: 1

    Whenever I see one of these vulnerability notices, I always go to to check/update my system, and I always find that my system has installed the fix itself, automatically. Honestly, it's really quite impressive. Nothing like the proprietary worlds. Thanks, Ubuntu, Debian, and the systemd teams!

  40. Whoosh! (Hint: ODM) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reference was not about INI files; it was about the AIX binary database of system and device configuration info known as ODM http://aix4admins.blogspot.com/2011/08/odm-object-data-manager-it-is-database.html?m=1.

    The joke is about what happens when you cross two binary system databases on the same UNIX...

  41. Reinventing the wheel = reinventing all the bugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Shitstemd apologists are too stupid to understand that by reinventing all these wheels also means reinventing all the bugs that have been long encountered and fixed in mature and stable code that shitstemd the project wants to reinvent.

    It doesn't matter if resolved is not part of the init, or not part of PID 1. It's part of the project and idiot maintainers are including it because they have zero clue about the software they're maintaining. They opted for systemd because unit files are easier to maintain than shell scripts. Fine. Then use JUST the init.

    Why the fuck do you have to include everything else, Ubuntu maintainers? What was so damn wrong with all the tried and tested resolving functions that you had to replace it with this steaming turd written by windows noobs who had no money to get into development for Windows, so they opted to take this mentality into Linux.

    You idiots think that the "systemd drama" has settled? Think twice. The crapfest and trainwreck has merely STARTED. Next: CVE of epic proportions that owned the entire systemd/linux ecosystem, brought down milions of webservers and ground the Internet to a halt.

    Stallman? When you're done eating your toe jam, perhaps you could chime in and defend the GNUserland which is fading away.

  42. Just two questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - When the description says "systemd-resolved is not used by default in Xenial", does that mean that most people need not worry after all?

    - When only Ubuntu is mentioned, does that mean it's not an issue in upstream Debian, or it just hasn't been confirmed there yet?

  43. Only affects 16.10 and 17.04 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FYI: This only affects 16.10 and 17.04, so everyone running 16.04.2 LTS is not affected.

    p.s. But if you're on 16.04.2, then you better update today anyway because today's patches include a fix for CVE-2017-1000364 (jumping the stack guard page).

  44. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ubuntu is also one out of thousands of Linux distros to choose from. Could just use a non systemd distro.

  45. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and should be irradicated from all distributions.

    Zapped with radiation?

  46. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it's only used by little nothings like Amazon, Google, Wikipedia, etc.

  47. Just Ubuntu? by aglider · · Score: 1

    If so, those guys introduced a bug into a working package.
    If not, those guy introduced a buggy package in a working environment.
    Blame those guys!

    --
    Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
  48. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 1

    And they don't just update willy-nilly to the latest distro. You update too quickly, you know you're really a canary in a cage. So the "solution" is to update again? I'd roll back to the previous version of whatever you were using and wait a bit.

    But hey, useful fools and all that ...

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
  49. Redhat... by sys64764 · · Score: 1

    There's all this whining about systemd and comparing it to Microsoft but comparing Redhat to Microsoft seems more appropriate, no?

    1. Re:Redhat... by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      When I think of Microsoft I think giant anti-competitive sneaky dirty tricks, such as embrace and extend, a.k.a make a new friend, stab him in the back, move into his house, and sleep with his wife.

      I'm not seeing anything on the scale of MS's standard playbook going on anywhere in the Linux world.

  50. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, Linus has nothing to do with SystemD, but if you could find enough dirt on Pottering to get him in the slammer you'd probably get a medal of some sort.

  51. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Window by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I have been validated!!!

    I told y'all muthafuckas this would happen.

    #FuckSystemd

  52. Yes, News! by thesupraman · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The news is clear, Shill.

    The news here is that systemd, in its usual 'we know better than anyone, even though we have very very little experience' way replaced perfectly functional systems for the most dubious of reasons (usually 'because we want to make them different, and cannot even be bothered raising our reasons with maintainers of existing solutions because then we may need to rationalise what we want'), and went away and implemented a system broken in a way SO foolish that the existing solutions have addressed exactly these issues decades ago.
    Not to mention the fact that they have worked hard to try and make it unavoidable that ALL linux solutions will end up with the problems caused by their basic ignorance by making systemd basically indespensible.

    Clear enough? Or perhaps you think a trivially exploitable and almost indefensible DNS bug, along with a file system wiping bug (the good old rm ../...) are just minor bumps on the road to nirvana?

    Of course the clear and obvious REASON for systemd is a power grab by RedHat to give them control of the Linux 'standard'. It is unfortunate that they cannot see past their own grab at power to see how damaging such an approach is to the robustness of Linux itself -they must turn away, stick their fingers in their ears, and sing 'la la la la, wont happen to us, la la la la' loudly to themselves each time a big windows exploit drops these days.. Because that is the endpoint of the path they are following.

    1. Re:Yes, News! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a trivially exploitable and almost indefensible DNS bug

      Are we talking about glibc? https://access.redhat.com/articles/2161461

      Or is glibc also written by incompetent idiots? Is the Linux kernel also written by incompetent idiots?

  53. A nothing burger! by Jerry · · Score: 1

    Talk about a "nothing burger" ... this is one!

    The fix? Merely a standard "sudo apt upgrade & sudo apt full-upgrade", something most users of Ubuntu & its derivatives do with automatic updates.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  54. Re:Linux might become as insecure as Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Systemd is an unaudited piece of code which has everything but kernel access, and even listens on the network. It is no wonder that a remote root exploit hasn't been found yet. With the "you use systemd on your job, or you won't have a job", it has become widespread, but because there is no separation of tasks (hint: the guys who made sendmail learned about this the hard way in the mid-1990s when there was a root escalation issue every other day for a while). Just one blob of code, with nothing to show any security methodology or testing behind it.

    It is actually astonishing that Linux hasn't gotten hit big time by this. Systemd may be by some great politicans who get their way in the Linux scene, but the people systematically looking for any holes to be exploited are well-paid by governments and other well-heeled organizations.

  55. Re:Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    systemd could be a M$ implant to destroy Linux.
    systemd should be eradicated from all distro or just make it optional at install time and not buried deep down like IE in windows, where uninstalling it would destroy the OS.

  56. This vulnerability doesn't affect Ubuntu LTS by PhunkySchtuff · · Score: 1

    Just be aware that if you're running a LTS version of Ubuntu, it doesn't have this vulnerability.
    As per the linked article, this issue affects Ubuntu 17.04 & Ubuntu 16.10. The most recent LTS release is 16.04

  57. Re:Guess Who "No Time" 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hosssssssst filessssss.... My precioussssssssss...

  58. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll commission a statue

  59. Lennart from RedHat _Desktop_ team, rules over eve by cryptogranny · · Score: 1

    Somebody explain to me please, how come that Lennart from RedHat _Desktop_ team, rules over everything?! I just don't get it.

  60. Re: Linux might become as insecure as Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does too many things. Not one thing, and well, but lots of things. Just asking for it.

  61. Untrue (my posts here now prove it) &? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine. Your software is well written, functional. The Host File Engine performs exactly as promised by mmell

    his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant

    his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg

    I've never tried to belittle (APK's) work, I've flat out said it's good by BronsCon

    take a look at the APK hosts file engine by SuperKendall

    APK is kinda right. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works by bmo

    I like your host file system by Karmashock

    I find your hosts file admirable by vel-ex-tech

    APK your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice by BlueStrat

    * My code's recommended & hosted by Malwarebytes' hpHosts!

    APK

    P.S.=> You're also VASTLY outnumbered by /.ers UNIDENTIFIABLE "ne'er-do-well" (want more like those above? Ask)... apk

  62. Re: Proof that Linux is just as insecure as Windo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go use Windows why posting here

  63. Guess Who "No Time" 4u... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: "There's NO TIME LEFT 4U - on my way to BETTER THINGS (I found myself some wings)" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-VUnAuysMM/

    * Sorry...

    APK

    P.S.=> Grow up... apk

  64. How was Lennart able to progress this far?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously

    The man had the hot mess that is PulseAudio on his hands, and not only did he not fix that, he grew meglomanical and tried to move up the food chain. Wouldn't good stewardship of a fairly core linux audio stack be a prerequisite to trying to take over init?

  65. Re:Linux might become as insecure as Windows! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There seemed to be a lot of arguments over at Debian, so much that a group of those involved left to create a fork of Debian.

    That's wrong. Devuan was started by people not invloved in Debian after a well-known internet troll trolled them into doing so :)

    The self-proclaimed "Veteran" "Unix" "Admins" (aka art students and anti-vaxxers) still have little idea how Debian works and thus took an eternity to release something that just changed the default init. It will get more amusing when they start to discover what managing a distribution actually involves as their infrastructure isn't designed to handle it.