Of course this goes to a General Resolution

Posted Feb 13, 2014 7:52 UTC (Thu) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389)
In reply to: Of course this goes to a General Resolution by mbt
Parent article: The Debian technical committee vote concludes

> In current systems, an attacker might never be sure of the mix of components. Given the variety of init systems, loggers, cron daemons, power-control systems, and such in current Linux installations, a one-size-fits-all attack is harder to mount.

We all run a single kernel codebase and I'm sure spender or PaXTeam could tell you all about the problems you have running it before you stack stuff on top of it.

And besides, are you really arguing that having a pile of stuff that attackers can't deal with it anyways? Have you seen the stuff that gets worked around by people? Do you really expect every sysadmin to require such a diverse skillset just to deal with whatever heterogeneity in their system set may be?

For logind and cgroups, logind uses a DBus API to talk to the single cgroup manager. What else can it do in the New World Order of cgroups? If you implement that API (like, say, systemd-shim), you can get away with not using systemd as PID 1.