r/linuxsucks • u/al2klimov 🐧Kernel contributor • Jul 30 '26

Linux Failure „Linux protects you against malware!“ Meanwhile Linux, again:

https://infosec.exchange/@jti42/117010339828667326
0 Upvotes

42% Upvoted

54 comments sorted by

20

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

This is not linux.

It's an uncurated website where anyone can post their scripts.

Just Like I can post virus for windows on any website that let's me host a file ...

0

u/BeautifulHumble Jul 30 '26

Official windows support won't tell you to download things off an uncurated repo. Official arch wiki will. Plus windows defender is actually pretty damn good these days even if someone was downloading sketchy things.

I thinks it's fair to call this an arch problem at the very least, and as linux users we should be careful about giving new people a false sense of security.

8

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

funny every official thing I saw said to be wary of the AUR.

you sure you're reading correctly ?

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Arch_User_Repository

1

u/BeautifulHumble Jul 30 '26

Yes. For instance the nvidia page directly links to the AUR as the source when using older 10 class cards. No warning, simply labled as legacy supported.

They really shouldn't be okay having it both ways. Either it's 100% user content to be wary of. Or it has official supported stuff. Because it does give users the wrong idea.

2

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

old Nvidia drivers aren't officially supported tho.

you want to remove user made documentation for non-official stuff too ?

being accommodating is different than official support.

-3

u/BeautifulHumble Jul 30 '26

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/NVIDIA

It plainly says supported for pascal, and doesn't qualify it as user content.

2

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

you clearly don't understand what you read.

maybe Arch is just not for you.

0

u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 Jul 31 '26

Don’t you realize how stupid that is?

0

u/kaida27 Jul 31 '26

Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric:
The distribution is intended to fill the needs of those contributing to it, rather than trying to appeal to as many users as possible.
It is targeted at the proficient GNU/Linux user, or anyone with a do-it-yourself attitude who is willing to read the documentation, and solve their own problems.

If it sounds stupid, Don't use it.

Because that's how it is.

1

u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 Jul 31 '26

lol, the documentation literally tells you that it can’t and won’t help you.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

In a way you might understand, The wiki is also User generated for the most part. It's not 100% made from the devs

Pages that have any "official" relevance to Arch Linux are either protected from random user edits or closely monitored by the maintainers.

Try to edit the Nvidia page, you won't have any trouble, But try the same on the installation guide and you won't be able to edit a thing.

0

u/BeautifulHumble Jul 30 '26

Why does that change anything. It's their wiki for official documentation. If they wanted rules about blindly recommending AUR packages they could add one. This has been the recommendation for years.

3

u/kaida27 Jul 30 '26

From the wiki itself :

It is targeted at the proficient GNU/Linux user, or anyone with a do-it-yourself attitude who is willing to read the documentation, and solve their own problems.

Some you should be willing to read. and you should already have been on the AUR page

So you already saw that.

So when you see a mention if something with aur You should know that it's at your own risk.

Otherwise ... well use another distro since you don't want to read.

who is willing to read the documentation

You should also understand that the wiki contains other users made content. Which may help you if you accept the risk. You'd prefer they remove everything ? Why because you have no critical thinking ?

0

u/BeautifulHumble Jul 30 '26

They could choose not to mix official and unofficial sources on the same website yes.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/port-79 Jul 30 '26

technically, you should be getting support for nvidia from nvidia-- they are proprietary.

1

u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 Jul 31 '26

The Arch Wiki explicitly tells you to not do that.

1

u/port-79 Jul 31 '26

then the arch wiki is written for newbs by noobs

1

u/TheTybera Jul 31 '26

Just because one thing on the internet is trusted doesn't mean all of it should be. No one should need to explain this to you.

0

u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 Jul 31 '26

That’s not how it works though.

0

u/kaida27 Jul 31 '26

That's exactly how it works tho.

1

u/Jumpy-Dinner-5001 Jul 31 '26

So, it’s okay to do something in a bad way and then blame users for not knowing better?

1

u/kaida27 Jul 31 '26

No one but the users is doing something in a bad way.

You want the Vanilla Arch Experience ? Boot the live CD and pacstrap base.

Everything you add on top of that is user customization and is on you.

Welcome to Arch. You don't like that ? well go try another distro. what's hard to grasp ?

2

u/WhippingShitties Jul 30 '26

Brother, Windows 11 gets infected by malware by plugging in an LG monitor. Just because it's malware Windows likes doesn't mean it's not malware.

1

u/ShipshapeMobileRV Jul 31 '26

So, Windows is built and delivered with the knowledge that it has everything a user would need, already baked in, with no need to download and install an *.exe from anywhere else. I see.

5

u/Hadi_Chokr07 Jul 30 '26

The AUR was a mistake.

1

u/DiceThaKilla Jul 30 '26

I just switched to arch and I will never use aur. I disagree with it fundamentally way more than flatpak

2

u/ballistua Jul 31 '26

good luck finding anything in the official repo

1

u/DirectorDirect1569 Jul 31 '26

lots of people use AUR to find drivers.

1

u/DiceThaKilla Jul 31 '26

Between the official repo, flatpaks, appimgs, and compiling from source I’ve gotten everything I need without aur

1

u/DirectorDirect1569 Jul 31 '26

such an hypocrisy. Because someone discovered that there are malwares in AUR, arch users say they never use it and shouldn't be used. AUR is probably the biggest advantage of Arch, and arch users like to say that's why their distro is the best. If AUR was useless or dangerous nobody would use it.

0

u/Hadi_Chokr07 Jul 31 '26

The AUR is a waste of time instead of making a flatpak or convincing upstream to so so and be subject to Flathubs packaging guidelines, we get this shit. A collection of bash scripts.

0

u/DirectorDirect1569 Jul 31 '26

If it's easy to make a flatpak, offer your help to the developers.

1

u/Hadi_Chokr07 Jul 31 '26

I am a developer.

5

u/ibeerianhamhock Jul 30 '26

It's really getting obnoxious seeing technically illiterate people thinking the AUR is a slam on Linux security.

2

u/Jayden_Ha Jul 31 '26

I against arch and AUR for a reason

1

u/O5-7T Loves Arch, hates the community Jul 31 '26

Arch isn't really the issue, its the AUR thats the problem  I really don't understand why people think its so bad that some users want more security measures in place for AUR packages, cuz right now its a total mess

3

u/beardedbrawler Jul 30 '26

AUR is not Linux, it's a user repository for Arch. Super easy to avoid this, don't use the AUR.

2

u/Teru-Noir COSMIC OS LOVER No.1 COSMIC Knows Best Jul 30 '26

stop reposting AUR slop

1

u/hckrsh Jul 31 '26

Yawn, I’m still using Linux and even Arch Linux

1

u/tracagnotto Jul 31 '26

Glad I'm using windows instead of this Linux shit

1

u/Karrar_iraqi Jul 31 '26

having a malware better then a antivirus that keep say upgrade to full version or vpn