this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
557 points (99.3% liked)

Privacy

32130 readers
1151 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 273 points 3 months ago (4 children)

The story does not tell us how Linus Torvalds responded to the NSA, but I’m guessing he told them he wouldn’t be able to inject backdoors even if he wanted to, since the source code is open, and all changes to it are reviewed by many independent people.

Yeah I'm guessing the answer would be more colorful based on the historical data we have

[–] reisub@discuss.tchncs.de 127 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] bitfucker@programming.dev 105 points 3 months ago (1 children)

There aren't enough swear-words in the English language, so now I'll have to call you perkeleen vittupää just to express my disgust and frustration with this crap.

Beautiful

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 33 points 3 months ago

It's like our very own Gordon Ramsay

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 44 points 3 months ago

Also experience shows that it's possible to backdoor software in very subtle ways that could go years without anyone spotting them. So if he had decided to he probably could have done it, despite Linux being open source.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

I would pay money to see daddy Linus flip off some big shot intelligence official

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

Oh man would die to see his reply. It would probably start with something like

"The fact that I have to explain this to a person who works in a national security agency makes me really worried..."

[–] Tixanou@lemm.ee 126 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Ohh so it's the NSA that my failed sudos are reported to!

[–] Scrollone@feddit.it 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Recent versions of sudo changed that message and now I'm sad 😢

[–] amongstthetrees@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago

Damn, I'm going to miss those messages one day on my Debian stable server.

[–] fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works 15 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Switch to doas so feds don't get any more reports!

[–] sntx@lemm.ee 19 points 3 months ago

nah, we have run0 at home

[–] Icalasari@fedia.io 117 points 3 months ago (5 children)

I somehow misread that as NBA, and was very confused what basketball had to do with OS backdoors

NSA makes

WAY more sense

[–] Steamymoomilk@sh.itjust.works 51 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Michel jordan want to look at your browser history :D

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Nope this has Kareem written all over it

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 11 points 3 months ago

A OS backdoor is very simular to a backdoor cut, which allows a player to sneak behind defenders when they are focused on the ball or player with a ball.

NBA coaches have taken inspiration from many different places to perfect their plays. Computer security is just another step.

[–] chottomatte@lemdro.id 11 points 3 months ago

I read it NASA at first

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 105 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Years ago there was a commit to the Linux kernal that strangly had no author. This got some attention of several of the developers.

Looking into the code that had to deal with network transmission. there was a section that if you tried to get network access in a unusual way had a check that was written something like this.

If (usr_permission = ROOT) ... Instead of If (usr_permission == ROOT) ...

The first giving the user root if invoked and the second checking to see if the user was root.

It's widely thought this was the NSA or some other intelligence agency trying to backdoor lin Linux.

[–] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The other side of that coin is the NSA developing SELinux

[–] brianorca@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago (1 children)

This is because NSA has two roles: eavesdropping on foreign adversaries, and protecting our internal systems from adversaries. Under the first role, they might introduce an exploit known only to themselves. Under the second, they help protect US systems from exploits known to others.

[–] BobGnarley@lemm.ee 13 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And because of this it makes whatever they fuck with have unnecessary security issues.

Also though they are using it to straight up spy on you whether foreign or not. They got in "trouble" for it once and pinky swore not to do it again.

Fuck the NSA

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Or it could of been any person or country. It was a nothing burger and is still a nothing burger

[–] Hugin@lemmy.world 26 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

It was clearly an attack. By who is unknown.

Notably this was in 2003 before git (2005) so linux source was in a central bitkeeper repo. So a commit with no associated data about who did it should not have been possible.

Here is a more detailed article. https://lwn.net/Articles/57135/

[–] desertdruid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

speaking in burger terms as any good american

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] BmeBenji@lemm.ee 98 points 3 months ago

This incident will be reported

[–] cypherpunks@lemmy.ml 64 points 3 months ago (1 children)

he wouldn’t be able to inject backdoors even if he wanted to, since the source code is open

Jia Tan has entered the chat

[–] thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world 6 points 3 months ago

The project contains binary blobs anyway so theoretically it wouldn't be super hard

[–] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 57 points 3 months ago (2 children)

But nobody's going to give them any sentence for that unfortunately.

[–] awiteb@lemmy.4rs.nl 48 points 3 months ago (2 children)

I wouldn't be surprised if I knew that the backdoors that appear in Windows were designed by someone. I didn't know they were this brazen.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 25 points 3 months ago (4 children)
[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

Yeah, when the actual mobo and cpu can be taken over remotely, what does the OS even matter?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml 18 points 3 months ago (4 children)

I didn't know they were this brazen.

Oh boy i remember when i was this innocent

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] einkorn@feddit.org 15 points 3 months ago

For what? Destabilizing the whole technological ecosystem of the planet is not a crime. ¯\(ツ)

[–] ragica@lemmy.ml 49 points 3 months ago

As long as the backdoor is licenced GPL what's the problem?

[–] scorp@lemmy.ml 48 points 3 months ago (1 children)

good thing he's not an American citizen

[–] DacoTaco@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Except he is. He lives in portland now afaik

[–] scorp@lemmy.ml 10 points 3 months ago
[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 36 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Here's where Linus did/said the thing. (He is the second person from the right.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gRsgkdfYJ8

[–] NGC2346@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 months ago

When was the last analysis of the linux kernel source code ?

[–] jjlinux@lemmy.ml 12 points 3 months ago (2 children)

If you want t see Mr. Torvalds questioning this in the video in the link, go straight to minute 43.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fart_pickle@lemmy.world 11 points 3 months ago

Circa 1975, IBM proposed the cipher now called DES, the Data Encryption Standard. It became a worldwide standard for secret key encryption. As IBM originally designed it, DES had a 64-bit key. The National Security Agency (NSA) required that the key be reduced from 64 bits to 56 bits, with the other 8 bits used as a checksum. This made no sense. If a checksum were really needed, then the key could be increased from 64 to 72 bits. It was widely believed that the real reason the NSA made this demand was that it knew how to crack messages using a 56-bit key, but not messages using a 64-bit key. This proved to be true.

Secret Key Cryptography by Frank Rubin

[–] delirious_owl@discuss.online 7 points 3 months ago

Lol good year for the NSA

load more comments
view more: next ›