this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
59 points (96.8% liked)

Linux

47232 readers
825 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Is Linux not free software itself? I thought propietary stuff was added downstream.

Am I getting something wrong?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 51 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (15 children)

A lot of drivers for hardware are actually not open source, just unreadable binaries that do ...something. No one knows exactly how they work, so some people consider them a security risk.

I think its because the linux kernel is GPL2, not the modern GPL3 like most free software, so I think thats why some components are allowed to be non-free. Not sure though.

So, that practice violates the spririt of free software. So some distributions have those components removed. Its safer, but you may lose functionality, depending on what computer components you have.

Its an important project, and judging by the other comments here, underappreciated.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago (4 children)

Could we please stop associating open source with security? Don't get me wrong, I love open source software and it is easier to trust open source software than proprietary, because it is highly unlikely, that they hide stuff like trackers in there. It is also most of the time highly configurable and sometimes even hackable and as a software developer you are able to look into the mechanisms behind the APIs which is sometimes really helpful.

But events like the lzma incident last year and predictable openssl RNG in Debian some time ago (https://lists.debian.org/debian-security-announce/2008/msg00152.html) should tell us, that open source doesn't mean secure software. And the argument, that there are many people looking at the code is not really true. E.g. many maintainers of the linux kernel only look at specific parts/drivers in it and maybe into some other things they need for that. There are probably only a few people if any (apart from governments), that have read, understood and analyzed the linux kernel in its entirety with all the (open source) drivers built into it and all the possible combinations of configurations. And I don't want to know how many have done all that for less popular projects. And even if that is done at some point for an upstream project, you would have to check the patches from your distro and if there are any do it all for yourself again. And when the next release arrives you would have to do all that in its entirety again (although with some head start) if a new version arrives (that has, say, at least a thousand lines of code changed, removed or added). And now think about how many big releases come with some software per year. And don't forget to also include all the dependencies you have to check including the compiler and standard library of the language(s) used.

Of course it is easier to do all that for OSS as an outside party because you don't have to decompile it, but it is still increadibly hard. And only to be easier to analyze for security risks doesn't mean to be more secure just like packaging being recyclable doesn't mean that it will be recycled.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is why I like fediverse. Redditors would downvote this to oblivion.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Well, the majority still seems to be unhappy. I think it is mainly because I chose Linux as an example and it reads like I think that Linux is not secure software which is not at all what I intended to say and also (obviously?) not what I think is true.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)