On Sat, Jan 2, 2016 at 12:47 AM, Michael Gardner <gardne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jan 1, 2016, at 21:31, Toby Crawley <t...@tcrawley.org> wrote:
>>
>> But if we had a regular
>>    process that crawled all of the mirrors and the canonical repo to
>>    verify that the checksums every artifact are identical, this could
>>    actually improve security, since we could detect if any checksum
>>    had been changed
>
> I would caution against this approach. An attacker could easily target 
> specific organizations, serving compromised artifacts only to particular IP 
> ranges. A periodic verification process wouldn't detect this[1], and might 
> lend a false sense of security that lulls people into putting off real 
> security measures.
>
> [1] Unless run by every organization that uses lein, and even then it still 
> might not catch anything if the attackers are clever.
>

That's a good point. Would you trust this approach more if the mirrors
were all managed by the clojars staff instead of by community members?
You currently trust the clojars staff to not act maliciously, and to
detect an intrusion by a third party against clojars.org.

- Toby

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to