• Feyd@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    I feel like these headlines are designed to be way scarier than the scenarios actually are to people that don’t know much about Arch Linux.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      true and part of me suspects that it’s intentional on the part of arch users so that they can continue to tell the world that they “use arch btw” lol

  • Samsy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is AUR more risky than before? Nope. But this targets more people than ever. StreamOS and CachyOS are pretty popular these days.

    • Karna@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      This is the most likely reason why all of sudden there is an uptick in attempt to embed malware in AUR build scripts.

  • Mactan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    I saw two pkgbuild from the user, I don’t really know what I’m looking at in pkgbuilds generally but these were dead obvious something was bogus . downloading arbitrary files from some url like (segs)(dot)(lol) hopefully sufficiently defanged

  • MyNameIsRichard@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The malicious packages were found and removed quite quickly. Also anyone who doesn’t blindly install from the AUR would have seen a suspicious .lol url. I suppose that a genuine package using a .lol url isn’t impossible, it’s just very unlikely,

    These attacks do demonstrate the strength and weakness of the AUR, that anyone can upload anything at any time. The same as flathub and the snap store. Treat all of them with appropriate caution.

    • Karna@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Flatpak does have a concept of Verified Publisher. Many distros ship flatpak app store with default filter set to Verified Publisher only.

      • Daniel Quinn@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        That sounds like a nice feature we could use for the Aur actually. We already have the votes value, but some sort of verification body could help rescue the Aur’s reputation.

  • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    isnt that well known though? AUR packages are built by third parties (eg users) and there were always warnings against just this, no?

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It is a well known risk but not something that was a real risk numerically. I mean, it still isn’t given the number of packages in the AUR.

      This is a couple of malicious packages discovered in a short period though. Not a good sign. It was really impact the AUR if polluting it with malware became common.

      You should always inspect AUR packages before installing them but few people do. Many would not even know what they were looking at.

      • ☂️-@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        yeah, that’s almost as bad as those apps requiring you to pipe a remote script through sudo shell

  • Mugita Sokio@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    This is why I just use the Chaotic AUR, knowing that something like this was being posted everywhere. My producer, Neigsendoig, does the exact same with his machine.

    We both use CachyOS anyway.