From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Cook, Malcolm" Subject: security concerns of using guix packages Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 00:38:49 +0000 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59363) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAp0J-0005pq-VB for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:38:56 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAp0G-0003CK-Pv for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:38:55 -0400 Received: from smtp01.stowers.org ([40.141.174.61]:51226) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZAp0G-0003Bi-JZ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 20:38:52 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (smtp01.stowers.org [127.0.0.1]) by smtp01.stowers.org (8.14.7/8.14.7) with SMTP id t630cphY006424 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2015 19:38:51 -0500 Received: from mbsrv01.sgc.loc (mbsrv01.sgc.loc [10.0.52.150]) by smtp01.stowers.org with ESMTP id 1v8yqqjjgm-1 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2015 19:38:51 -0500 Content-Language: en-US List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Guix-devel Cc: "McGee, Jenny" Hello Guixen (Guixers? Guix-noscenti?) The sys admin at my institute expresses concern that we would potentially e= xpose ourselves to additional security risk by building scientific software= stack in Guix where we might depend on alternate versions of, say, openssl= . Do you agree this is a reasonable concern, and, if so, is there a "position= statement" on the matter? =20 I'm guessing this is in part a matter of trust - i.e. do we trust GNU/guix = gang as much as, say the Red Hat/CentOS gang. Or am I perhaps misunderstan= ding the consideration? I'd be interested in hearing any position on the matter. Thanks for your consideration, Malcolm Cook Computational Biology Stowers Institute for Medical Research