Canonical Developer Criticizes Linux Mint's Security
Phoronix: Canonical Developer Criticizes Linux Mint's Security
While Linux Mint is derived from Ubuntu's package-set, a Canonical developer has criticized the popular Ubuntu derivative for its handling of packaging upgrades that could leave the system in a vulnerable state...
That's Canonical developers for you - only good at "developing" cheap PR. And their boss is their mentor.
Mint is vulnerable -- Agreed. No doubt.
Canonical is vulnerable too with kernel updates. They don't backport all the fixes done from kernel.org. Instead calling shots on Mint they should mind their own business of doing things right.
Debian doesn't update all the security fixes in sid and sometimes they let it bit rot for weeks. I was told by debian developer that doing regular kernel updates is not a wise usage of the Debian resources.
Telling users that there is no security support in sid/Testing doesnt want me to use debian either.
The distros that does timely security fixes are Fedora/RHEL &its clones and Arch linux is catching up even better than opensuse.
The other distros are just super duper vulnerable.
Even though this sounds like a campaign to discredit one of their most popular competitors, if what he says is true, there should be a serious concern about those issues.
Originally Posted by prodigy_
At first I was confused by the title; I thought Mint didn't change much of anything that comes standard from Ubuntu/Debian. And if they did, surely they wouldn't let it become a potential issue.
But I was wrong. Sorta. I can definitely see how this COULD be an issue at some point. Although, right now so few people use this platform that it isn't likely to be targeted in any major way, so I dunno if I would raise any red flags about it just yet. But it is always good to lean on the side of security if it's a reasonable option, so this could be a good moment for them to allocate some resources toward getting security patched included faster... If they have the extra resources to do so with. Which by itself could be an issue, over-stretching their workforce. Kinda like what Canonical does, minus the multi-millionaire funding the project.
In any case, this could be considered constructive critisizm, at least. A valid point was made and being proactive can't hurt.
Linux Mint and Cinnamon is awesome.
I guess this is a good bit of information to have.
It is letting any developer/package maintainer know that they should help the team.
Linux Mint 16 is a real treat to use and I hope I can personally help when I get some extra time.
It makes sense when you have less developers maintaining said updates.
Debian isn't great either with kernel updates.
Ubuntu doesn't backport all the security updates in a kernel too.
So there are people here gullible enough to believe this sort of crap. Wow, just wow.
Canonical has been constantly bleeding their market share to other distros (but mainly to Mint because Mint offers the mildest learning curve to an Unbutu ex-user) for nearly 4 years. They thought they could afford it. But now with Ubuntu Touch/Ubuntu Phone going nowhere some guys are genuinely afraid of losing their jobs. And instead of saying "hey, we admit we were wrong about the whole upstart/plymouth/unity/mir debacle" they go out and start spreading slander and outright lies about Mint. Predictable but still pathetic.
They're not even developers. They're maintainers and without Debian they wouldn't even have a distro to maintain. They're also not security experts although they surely would love to pose as such. My diagnosis? A bunch of nobodies with outdated dreams of world domination. Hm, where have I seen that before?
Oh, and in a week they'll "apologize".