This content type is full of IndieWeb post types, which are all content types which allow me to take greater ownership of my own data. These are likely unrelated to my blog posts. You can find a better breakdown by actual post kind below:
Q1 2024 is officially behind us.
So we figured that it was a great time for a bit of reflection on the exciting start to the year. In this episode, we sit down with our founders, Stephen, Chris, and Pete, to get a bit of perspective on how the last three months played out.
We chat about On-call, our AI launch, and the hundreds of other features, bug fixes, and bits of polish and delight that we've shipped over the last 12 weeks.
We also chat about the state of the company as a whole, our growth, and ultimately what's on the horizon.
I recently went through a job search, and I thought it would be good to do a mini retrospective on the whole experience. Overall, it was a better candidate experience than the last time I interviewed so I want to believe that the industry is making progress.
Robin Guldener from Nango talks to Mike about building an open, unified API, the value of building on top of Open Source products, and building a growing product team on this episode of the podcast.
Josh and Kurt talk about the recent events around XZ. It’s only been a few days, and it’s amazing what we already know. We explain a lot of the basics we currently know with the attitude much of these …
Which is smarter: specializing in a particular tech or becoming more of a generalist? It depends! Which is why Jerod invited “undercover generalist” Adolfo Ochagavía on our “It Depends” series to weigh the pros & cons of each path.
Just did a task that was open since Feb. 20th that will unblock six teammates doing full-time work starting this week. It took 5 minutes 35 seconds to finish. I will, again, learn nothing from this.
I really can only shitpost about the #xv debacle because the whole thing just makes me tired and sad. Anyone paying even a tiny bit of attention to the conversation about open source sustainability could have told you this was inevitable. And now we're watching people blame a volunteer trying to step back, and rehashing all the same old tired arguments we've been having literally for decades. It's just so tired and predicable and boring and sad.
My favorite Ren Faire story:
I knew a guy who kept a Starfleet insignia pinned to the inside of his garb. A few times per season, some folks would come to the Faire cosplaying as a Star Trek landing party, investigating a “primitive” world.
He would take them aside, show his insignia, and identify himself as a Starfleet officer on a cultural research mission. He’d call them out for breaking the Prime Directive and ruining his research. Then he’d demand to know what ship they’re from, and threaten to get them court martialed if they didn’t change into something less conspicuous.
Polite reminder about the Jia Tan XZ hack: if an organization is so well run and well funded that it's able to play that long a game to that degree of depth and sophistication, that organization does not have all its eggs in one basket.
When Elon Musk, JK Rowling and the cops are unhappy, you know it’s a good law that will protect people.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68703684
There’s a combo hot take brewing in my head about the #xz and #redis debacles.
It goes something like:
When the shit hits the fan and part of the reason appears to be an overworked and underpaid maintainer, lots of people come out of the woodwork to demand more respect and money for them.
But when a maintainer recognizes that they’re in an unsustainable situation and dares to make a proactive change, well FUCK THAT GUY. WHO THE HELL DOES HE THINK HE IS?
Anyone who thinks commit signing is the answer to malicious actors, at a time when the web of trust has been killed by a lil green verified box, is foolish.
Like sure they verify that someone who can log into a particular GitHub account is the author of a commit, but that… don’t mean shit when the author is malicious 🙃
Originally a thread on Twitter about the xz/liblzma vulnerability, when I finished typing it, I realized I had a real world slice of Open Source interaction that deserved more attention.
nation state actor maintenance of an open source project may introduce a lot of backdoors, but it also helps a lot of PRs get merged, so, it;s impossible to say if its bad or not,
You can absolutely push your development cycle to the limit, the fastest programmer with a completely comprehensive suite of tests, sure. Go for it.
You will still be fundamentally hamstrung by not-fit-for-purpose tooling (JIRA), overly bureaucratic release processes, and slow deployment mechanisms.
Yes, be the most efficient developer you can, work in small increments and iterate effectively, but it's just as important to remove systematic issues that hinder you and your team.
I think the most important lesson from the xz incident is that if you're losing an online argument about the quality of your open-source project, you can now safely accuse the opponents of being state-sponsored sock puppets and drop the mic
hey does anybody out there have any thoughts about the xz compromise or perhaps have you thought of a way to relate it to some axe you have been grinding for 20 years
The clocks went forward an hour in the UK today, which raises an important question: when they go back in October will there be a compensatory Trans Hour Of Visibility?
I wrote this ⬆️ a few years ago.
As the fallout from the #XZ hack reverberates, expect to see people calling for a "real name" policy for contributors to critical infrastructure.
But, as I explain, there are several practical problems with that.
https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2021/02/whats-my-name-again/
That's before we get to the ethical and privacy issues. Oh, and making it *easier* for attackers to target named individuals.
Maintenance is more important than innovation.
This xz debacle is a symptom of a system that prioritizes lots of things above maintenance.
Take this as a reminder to rest, to mend things & pay attention to what needs mending in yourself. Do the radical thing of working slowly and making all things more whole.
Proposals(re)accepted: add slices.Repeat functionaccepted: report use of too-new standard library symbols with go vetFrom around the communityBlog: Context-induced performance bottleneck in Go by Gabriel AugendreNew community Q&A site: godev.com, powerd by Apache AnswerBlog: Go Enums Still Suck...
Jacob talks about the backlash against open source maintainers seeking compensation, ethical use of software, financial support for maintainers, and complexities in licensing.
If you want many eyes on your open source project, you need to get rid of assholes.
Bad community management is a security risk.
Assholes bully sole maintainers.
Assholes gatekeep and keep maintainer numbers low.
Assholes waste time on the mailing list with petty bullshit.
If you fundraise, assholes are bullying your grant writers and community managers.
Some of the best security contributors don't write a single line of code. They yeet assholes.
SQLite is often misconceived as a "toy database", only good for mobile applications and embedded systems because it's default configuration is optimized for embedded use cases, so most people trying it will encounter poor performances and the dreaded SQLITE_BUSY error. But what if I told you that by tuning a
I've been informed by the 11yo that his mother and I are the target of an antitrust lawsuit joined by at least 15 other children, that we have abused our power to maintain an illegal monopoly in the relevant market of "parenting decisions" specifically for preventing choice and putting in place limits regarding food, videogames, and other media, and have conspired to make it effectively impossible for them to switch to alternative parenting decision providers
My current take on the #xz situation, not having read the actual source backdoor commits yet (thanks a lot #Github for hiding the evidence at this point...) besides reading what others have written about it (cf. https://boehs.org/node/everything-i-know-about-the-xz-backdoor for a good timeline):
1. This is going to be an excellent teaching example for advanced supply chain attacks that I will definitely be using in the future - after much more in-depth analysis.
2. It seems to have been a long game, executed with an impressive sequence of steps and preparation, including e.g. disabling OSSFuzz checks for the particular code path and pressuring the original maintainer into accepting the (malicious) contributions.
3. The potential impact could have been massive, and we got incredibly lucky that it was caught and reported (https://www.openwall.com/lists/oss-security/2024/03/29/4) early. Don't count on such luck in the future.
4. Given the luck involved in this case, we need to assume a number of other, currently unknown supply chain backdoors that were successfully deployed with comparable sophistication and are probably active in the field.
5. Safe(r) languages like #rustlang for such central library dependencies would maybe (really big maybe) have made it a bit harder to push a backdoor like this because - if and only if the safety features are used idiomatically in an open source project - reasonably looking code is (a bit?) more limited in the sneaky behavior it could include. We should still very much use those languages over C/C++ for infrastructure code because the much larger class of unintentional bugs is significantly mitigated, but I believe (without data to back it up) that even such "bugdoor" type changes will be harder to execute. However, given the sophistication in this case, it may not have helped at all. The attacker(s) have shown to be clever enough.
6. Sandboxing library code may have helped - as the attacker(s) explicitly disabled e.g. landlock, that might already have had some impact. We should create better tooling to make it much easier to link to infrastructure libraries in a sandboxed way (although that will have performance implications in many cases).
7. Automatic reproducible builds verification would have mitigated this particular vector of backdoor distribution, and the Debian team seems to be using the reproducibility advances of the last decade to verify/rebuild the build servers. We should build library and infrastructure code in a fully reproducible manner *and* automatically verify it, e.g. with added transparency logs for both source and binary artefacts. In general, it does however not prevent this kind of supply chain attack that directly targets source code at the "leaf" projects in Git commits.
8. Verifying the real-life identity of contributors to open source projects is hard and a difficult trade-off. Something similar to the #Debian #OpenPGP #web-of-trust would potentially have mitigated this style of attack somewhat, but with a different trade-off. We might have to think much harder about trust in individual accounts, and for some projects requiring a link to a real-world country-issued ID document may be the right balance (for others it wouldn't work). That is neither an easy nor a quick path, though. Also note that sophisticated nation state attackers will probably not have a problem procuring "good" fake IDs. It might still raise the bar, though.
9. What happened here seems clearly criminal - at least under my IANAL naive understanding of EU criminal law. There was clear intent to cause harm, and that makes the specific method less important. The legal system should also be able to help in mitigating supply chain attacks; not in preventing them, but in making them more costly if attackers can be tracked down (this is difficult in itself, see point 8) and face risk of punishment after the fact.
H/T @GossiTheDog@cyberplace.social @AndresFreundTec@mastodon.social @danderson@hachyderm.io @briankrebs @eloy@hsnl.social
Attached: 1 image
This text is not something we wrote in a rush this morning to meet the moment. We've had variations on this on our site from day 1. I believed it then and I believe it now.
people are saying the xz backdoor is likely the work of a nation state actor, and given that it appears to been slow rolled for a couple of years and immediately became obsolete before it was fully launched - you do have to admit it bears the hallmarks of a government IT project
@Gaelan@cathode.church @neil@mastodon.neilzone.co.uk
You see, I saw your response and I *still* clicked anyway.
Social engineering will be the death of me.
New blogpost: _**[It is about trust, not software](https://neilzone.co.uk/2024-03-30-it-is-about-trust-not-software.html)**_
My reflections on the `xz` situation.
> This isn't about software, it's about trust, and trust, especially *digital* trust, is easy to misplace...