[Guidelines change] Changes to the packaging guidelines

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

zbyszek wrote:

> [...]
> Clarification: this change did not touch this part of the policy: that
> definition got copied over from the guidelines [1]. [...]

(The previous wording said a package that "...does not listen on a
network socket..." can be enabled by default, which was a broader
restriction and thus more secure.)


> Nevertheless, you raise an interesting question in general.  The way
> I understand the motivation for the restriction is to avoid any
> chance of attack or unexpected access over the network.  [...]

OK, so the question is - are we (still) trying to preclude -local-
escalation-of-privileges type problems?  If not, then many more
services can be enabled by default - as long as they bind only to
unix-domain sockets and/or localhost.  (I guess we're not supposed to
count on the default firewalls?)


- FChE