• ZephrC
    link
    fedilink
    1231 year ago

    OpenSUSE Tumbleweed has it. The Fedora 40 beta has it. Its just a result of being bleeding edge. Arch doesn’t have exclusive rights to that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s definitely common, but zstd is gaining on it since in a lot of cases it can produce similarly-sized compressed files but it’s quicker to decompress them. There’s still some cases where xz is better than zstd, but not very many.

    • Possibly linux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      It is not entirely clear either this exploit can affect other parts of the system. This is one those things you need to take extremely seriously

      • DefederateLemmyMl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        In the case of Arch the backdoor also wasn’t inserted into liblzma at all, because at build time there was a check to see if it’s being built on a deb or rpm based system, and only inserts it in those two cases.

        See https://gist.github.com/thesamesam/223949d5a074ebc3dce9ee78baad9e27 for an analysis of the situation.

        So even if Arch built their xz binaries off the backdoored tarball, it was never actually vulnerable.

        • Possibly linux
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          I just know there is a lot of uncertainty. Maybe a complete wipe is a over reaction but it is better to be safe

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1181 year ago

    Incorrect: the backdoored version was originally discovered by a Debian sid user on their system, and it presumably worked. On arch it’s questionable since they don’t link sshd with liblzma (although some say some kind of a cross-contamination may be possible via a patch used to support some systemd thingy, and systemd uses liblzma). Also, probably the rolling opensuse, and mb Ubuntu. Also nixos-unstalbe, but it doesn’t pass the argv[0] requirements and also doesn’t link liblzma. Also, fedora.

    Btw, https://security.archlinux.org/ASA-202403-1

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Yes, but Arch, though it had the compromised package, it appears the package didn’t actually compromise Arch because of how both Arch and the attack were set up.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      191 year ago

      Sid was that dickhead in Toystory that broke the toys.

      If you’re running debian sid and not expecting it to be a buggy insecure mess, then you’re doing debian wrong.

  • carl://
    link
    fedilink
    52
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Arch has already updated XZ by relying on the source code repository itself instead of the tarballs that did have the manipulations in them.

    It’s not ideal since we still rely on a potentially *otherwise* compromised piece of code still but it’s a quick and effective workaround without massive technical trouble for the issue at hand.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      instead of the tarballs that did have the manipulations in them

      My only exposure to Linux is SteamOS so I might be misunderstanding something, but if not:

      How in the world did it get infected in the first place? Do we know?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        From what I read it was one of the contributors. Looks like they have been contributing for some time too before trying to scooch in this back door. Long con.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Basically, one of the contributors that had been contributing for quite some time (and was therefore partly trusted), commited a somewhat hidden backdoor. I doubt it had any effect (as it was discovered now before being pushed to any stable distro and the exploit itself didnt work on Arch) bjt we’ll have to wait for the effect to be analyzed.

  • Sibbo
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    Arch users are really just cannon fodder against supply chain attacks.

  • JATth
    link
    fedilink
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I just did: “rm -rf xz

    pacman -Syu
    find / -name "*xz*"  | sort | grep -e '\.xz$' | xargs -o -n1 rm -i 
    pacman -Qqn | pacman -S -
    

    (and please, absolutely don’t run above as root. Just don’t.) I carefully answered to retain any root owned files and my backups, despite knowing the backdoor wasn’t included in the culprit package. This system has now “un-trusted” status, meaning I’ll clean re-install the OS, once the full analysis of the backdoor payload is available.

    Edit: I also booted the “untrusted” system without physical access to the web, no gui, and installed the fixed package transferred to it locally. (that system is also going to be dd if=/dev/zero'd)

  • yuki!
    link
    fedilink
    English
    47
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Bro WTF. How about you actually read up on the backdoor before slandering Arch. The backdoor DOES NOT affect Arch.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    68
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Arch is not vulnerable to this attack vector. Fedora Rawhide, OpenSUSE Tumbleweed and Debian Testing are.