• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 24th, 2025

help-circle

  • You make valid points. I don’t know that the word apathy is strong enough in this context, shrug. I mean, why not just say the thing? “This needs to be fleshed out”. At least it provides direction and context, (go push sand somewhere else; the TAB) and would probably be quicker/easier to write then sling this tired narrative, and non-answer to what is actually being asked;

    Thus seeking documented guidance on new Linux Security Module submissions for how they should be optimally introduced.

    (The TSEM LSM people aren’t trying to push a specific thing, they are asking for clarity of the process and particulars by witch a thing should be submitted; because from what I understand, their project (and others) keep hitting walls on the grounds of ‘formatting’ and ‘structure’; as a stop-gap, and thus an incomplete review, of the ideas and contents of the problem/solution set of the project. (Think: “It’s too difficult for me to read the thing, so I won’t until you fix it” – And not name with specifics to what is considered ‘fixed’, or what the process for re-submission is; It’s a backhand way of claiming “secret knowledge” over the thing and then saying “just fix it”. Fix what specifically ? )

    That is to say; when outsiders see these kinds of roadblocks, and the responses/narratives of key figures in these spaces is “apathy” of this degree, it feels something to me akin to security theater.


  • “Yes, I know that security people always think they know best, and they all disagree with each other, which is why we already have tons of security modules. Ask ten people what model is the right one, and you get fifteen different answers.”

    “I’m not in the least interested in becoming some kind of arbiter or voice of sanity in this.”

    How do you even get to a consensus model to tease these things out; when your answer is a refusal to engage with “pointless” things?

    It just seems contentious to me, that anyone when considering this kind of rhetoric, would make claims in regards to the level of security that Linux (may) provide. It just feels something akin to playing in the realm of security theater.








  • I think the gatekeeping part isn’t the warning or cautionary advice being given, It’s the failure to point, and give direction to, the relevant thing(s), the skill sets, the place to start in order to understand the complexities.

    Like the hart-surgeon analogy given elsewhere in the comments; it’s not just the dire warning of ‘you can kill someone’ - it’s the humanity to say, well if you want to learn how to do this, you’re going to have to start by having an understanding of basic biology, organic chemistry, human anatomy, etc, and to learn about those things go here…





  • Check out the ‘dx’ variants within universal blue It would be a good time to become familiar with rebasing.

    I run bluefin-dx environment. (gnome).

    There is a different learning curve to immutable/atomic systems and workflows. I don’t think it’s harder per say, it’s just you’ll have to be cognizant of the differences when searching for relative and relevant information when you come up against anything (like any opinionated *nix distro). Learn Homebrew, and Flatpack (and thier quarks running with atomic systems).