Is Fedora Have Backdoor ?!
moceap at hotmail.com
Sun Feb 22 23:15:47 UTC 2015
Even it just a Meta headers , the user approve must be taken. May at Fedora installation , and a way to stop must be available , too.
These issues must be in control by user .
> Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 17:44:59 -0500
> From: mattdm at fedoraproject.org
> To: devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Subject: Re: Is Fedora Have Backdoor ?!
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:37:44AM +0200, مصعب الزعبي wrote:
> > My friend didn't have enabled auto-update.
> There was an earlier discussion here. Even without updates
> automatically applied, metadata about potential updates is downloaded
> > He completely Surprised of un-human-authorized connection by fedora.
> Preventing automatic system network interactions is not explicitly a
> project goal, and we don't have any strong guidelines on this. If you
> think it _should_ be, you wouldn't be alone — but on the other hand,
> there are strong user benefits in making sure the system is up to date,
> there's no waiting for metadata downloads, network connectivity is correct,
> and so on; so, you'll need to build a strong case that this concern is
> the most important.
> > He disabled these actions by :
> > sudo echo 127.0.0.1 vm3.fedora.ibiblio.org proxy3.fedoraproject.org apps.fedoraproject.org 6-55-236-85.rev.customer-net.de >> /etc/hosts
> Since these connections really are innocuous, this seems more likely to
> do harm than good, but of course your friend can do this if wanted.
> Matthew Miller
> <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>
> Fedora Project Leader
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel