Re: Extension security?
- From: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika yahoo com>
- To: "Jasper St. Pierre" <jstpierre mecheye net>
- Cc: Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl>, "gnome-shell-list gnome org" <gnome-shell-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Extension security?
- Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 13:33:05 -0800 (PST)
----- Original Message -----
> From: Jasper St. Pierre <jstpierre mecheye net>
> To: Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika yahoo com>
> Cc: Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl>; "gnome-shell-list gnome org" <gnome-shell-list gnome org>
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 7:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Extension security?
>
> As I said before, this requires a lot of careful security and manual
> labor that I'm not comfortable doing. As such, I don't believe the
> mechanism, as you would like to see implemented, will be implemented.
Thanks for the response. Another (security non-expert) question:
How does Debian repository security compare to the current security of the
Gnome extension website/system? Specifically-- if a hacker gains entry into
a server that hosts a Debian repository and tries to change the data for
package foo, won't apt-get/synaptic/etc. complain and by default fail to
install the package because either the signature is invalid or the file checksum
doesn't check out?
I apologize for asking a Debian question on the Gnome list, but I'm having trouble
getting a response on #debian (I guess it looks like I'm fishing for security holes or
something).
-Jonathan
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancsika yahoo com>
> wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>> From: Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl>
>>> To: gnome-shell-list gnome org
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2011 10:51 PM
>>> Subject: Re: Extension security?
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 04:17:20PM +0100, Pauli Virtanen wrote:
>>>> It was clear already in the first post by J. Wilkes that this
> thread
>>>> was about a key kept on a non-public system.
>>>
>>> Colour me confused. I thought it already received a reply that it
> wasn't
>>> implemented.
>>
>> I'd like to know whether that means it wasn't implemented yet (but
> eventually
>> will be), wasn't implemented and may or may not be implemented later
> on, or
>> wasn't and will not be implemented.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jonathan
>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Olav
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnome-shell-list mailing list
>>> gnome-shell-list gnome org
>>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnome-shell-list mailing list
>> gnome-shell-list gnome org
>> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
>
>
>
> --
> Jasper
>
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]