Expanding the list of "Hardened Packages"

[Adam Williamson]

On 15/04/13 09:48 AM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net
> <mailto:h.reindl at thelounge.net>> wrote:
>
>     which raises the question again:
>
>     would it be not the better way to build the whole distribution hardened
>     by expierience that nearly anything is exploitable over the long and
>     performance comes after security
>
>
> The logical conclusion from this is to move to a language with automatic
> memory management.  The "top vulnerability" reports for programs written
> in C/C++ and most other languages so different that starting a new
> project that processes untrusted data in C/C++ is becoming indefensible.
>
> We seem to be stuck with C as the lowest common denominator that can be
> used from any runtime; long-term we _need_ to move away from that, or
> Linux will gain the reputation of least-secure OS around.
>
> Now, what to move to?  I currently don't have see any language/runtime I
> could recommend, which is in itself rather frightening.

Can I step in and ask: move *what* exactly?

This is the *Fedora* development list, remember. This thread was a 
discussion of the security of the Fedora package base as a whole. The 
Fedora project does not control the development of the code behind 99% 
of the Fedora package base. "The logical conclusion is to move to a 
different language" doesn't seem particularly logical at all in context 
- as a reply to Harald's proposal for build parameters for all Fedora 
packages - because you're advocating a completely different change, one 
it is not at all feasible for Fedora to effect in this context.

So you've just pivoted the entire thread, for which congratulations, but 
this could really have been a separate discussion.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net