668
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by renzev@lemmy.world to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 17 points 12 hours ago

To the feature creep: that's kind of the point. Why have a million little configs, when I could have one big one? Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. I get that there are use cases, but the average user doesn't like having to tweak every component of the OS separately before getting to doom-scrolling.

And that feature creep and large-scale adoption inevitably has led to a wider attack surface with more targets, so ofc there will be more CVEs, which—by the way—is a terrible metric of relative security.

You know what has 0 CVEs? DVWA.

You know what has more CVEs and a higher level of privilege than systemd? The linux kernel.

And don'tme get started on how bughunters can abuse CVEs for a quick buck. Seriously: these people's job is seeing how they can abuse systems to get unintended outcomes that benefit them, why would we expect CVEs to be special?

TL;DR: That point is akin to Trump's argument that COVID testing was bad because it led to more active cases (implied: being discovered).

[-] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 5 points 10 hours ago

Sure, some like overengineering.

[-] TheKingBee@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

is it overengineering or just a push back against "make each program do one thing well," and saying yeah but I have n things to do and I only need them done, well or not I just need them done and don't want to dig through 20 files to do it...

this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
668 points (96.0% liked)

linuxmemes

20705 readers
1182 users here now

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS