On Friday 03 April 2009 15:50:28 Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Florent Daignière <
> nextg...@freenetproject.org> wrote:
> 
> > Okay, so it's technically possible (anyway, pulling on a regular basis
> > was also an option)... but do we want to fetch code from a remote host
> > we don't control and auto-run it on emu? The building process involves
> > running the build-scripts.
> 
> Well, we don't control emu either, its sitting in Bytemark's datacenter.
> I'd say that github are at least as trustworthy as Bytemark.  

You miss the point. The auto-build runs on emu, so having compromised emu you 
can .... compromise emu! No net gain for any attacker.

> I assume 
> scripts will be run in a walled-off user account, and we can take measures
> to sandbox it - but it isn't like we are running the scripts after
> downloading them from wikipedia.

It is a legitimate concern, if it is misconfigured by either us or them. The 
right solution is for a trusted dev to code review, create a tag and sign it, 
and then release binaries from that tag. They can be built on his local 
machine, eliminating another reason for a central server hosted by us.
> 
> Ian.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to