Linux distros need to take more responsibility for security - InfoWorld - eviltoast
  • fubo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    98
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    enterprises

    … can pay engineers, rather than expecting volunteers to fix everything for them.

    • HumanPenguin@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      1 year ago

      while still paying less then the commercial OSes. That have been the victims of the vast majority of attacks and cost to corps using them.

      Its not like other OSes are attack free. Not requiring qualified engineers to keep them protected.

      That said. Ubuntu and their snap store are asking for trouble .

    • tal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ehh…Not really a mechanism for that that I can see. I mean, say that there’s demand for that, which I can believe. Do I go to a given distro and buy a “security hardened” version? I don’t see how that would work. Is the distro going to refrain from incorporating security fixes into the “non-hardened” free version?

      • jntesteves@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If you have read it, you might have noticed that the theme of the article is a company called Chainguard. Enterprises can pay them and get a secure software supply chain all the way down to the container image. More than that, their container distro is actually free and open-source, anyone can use it for free, it’s a one line change in your build script to go from Alpine to Wolfi. Enterprises can also buy a secure OS for bare-metal from Red Hat, SUSE, etc…