logoalt Hacker News

array_key_firsttoday at 5:42 AM2 repliesview on HN

No, other trusted repositories are legitimately better because the maintainers built the software themselves. They don't purely rely on binaries from the original developer.

It's not perfect and bad things still make it through, but just look at your example - XZ. This never made it into Debian stable repositories and it was caught remarkably quickly. Meanwhile, we have NPM vulnerability after vulnerability.


Replies

josephgtoday at 2:30 PM

Npm is all source based. Nobody is compiling binaries of JavaScript libraries. Cargo is the same.

I’m not really sure what you think a maintainer adds here. They don’t audit the code. A well written npm or cargo or pip module works automatically on all operating systems. Why would we need or want human intervention? To what? Manually add each package to N other operating systems? Sounds like a huge waste of time. Especially given the selection of packages (and versions of those packages) in every operating system will end up totally different. It’s a massive headache if you want your software to work on multiple Linux distros. And everyone wants that.

Npm also isn’t perfect. But npm also has 20x as many packages as apt does on Ubuntu (3.1M vs 150k). I wouldn’t be surprised if there is more malicious code on npm. Until we get better security tools, its buyer beware.

SoftTalkertoday at 6:20 AM

But do they audit the code? I say mostly no. They grab the source, try to compile it. Develop patches to fix problems on the specific platform. Once it works, passes the tests, it's done. Package created, added to the repo.

Even OpenBSD, famous for auditing their code, doesn't audit packages. Only the base system.

show 1 reply