Started By
Message

Linux Bans Univ of Minn for Bugs

Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:01 am
Posted by squid_hunt
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2021
11272 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:01 am
Linux Foundation Bans University of Minnesota After It Intentionally Submitted Buggy Patches
LINK: Tomshardware.com

They were doing research.

Always questioned the trustworthiness of open source. They do appear to have some controls.
Posted by Nado Jenkins83
Land of the Free
Member since Nov 2012
59759 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:02 am to
quote:

Our community does not appreciate being experimented on,


They got a sack. Like it.
Posted by Centinel
Idaho
Member since Sep 2016
43394 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:07 am to
Dick move by those kids. And more importantly, dick move by their professor who did nothing when they submitted the paper.

Posted by Helo
Orlando
Member since Nov 2004
4593 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:30 am to
The Linux community is all about peer review and testing.

The Microsoft patch system has been total garbage the past 2 or 3 years.

The last 2 patches have had patches to fix the patches because of bsod and performance issues.

Software updates are tricky but I like the Linux model more.
Posted by wileyjones
Member since May 2014
2322 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:41 am to
The source article comments are gold

quote:

Looks like this university should stick to parsing technical words in source code that they don't understand to find "offensive" terms and scream about them for SJWs

Posted by BorrisMart
La
Member since Jul 2020
8823 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 7:51 am to
I Basically know very very little about this but I know what Linux and open sourcing and all that is, but is this saying that Univ of Minn had a class that was submitting data to Linux for other people to use that was fricking up their computers?
Posted by Breauxsif
Member since May 2012
22290 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 8:35 am to
Seriously, this experiment could be conducted with consent, or in a less malicious way. The experimenter chose not to to cut corners, and instead abused a product level system. This is negligent programming as much as it is negligent research.

Either you get consent, so the involved system can implement safety checks to ensure your patches dont go to final production even if you fail to request they not apply the patch.

Or you introduce legit patches that involve some read only method of tracking if these patches were actually reviewed. Again, either by partnering with the party involved, or utilizing some approach to know if the artifacts were actually loaded.
Posted by LSU Coyote
Member since Sep 2007
53390 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 8:37 am to
Yeah, but the patch is not in official release. It gets vetted by the community.

Open Source is fine, you are missing the point.
Posted by hob
Member since Dec 2017
2132 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 9:22 am to
NCAA sanctions incoming.



Posted by AUstar
Member since Dec 2012
17062 posts
Posted on 4/22/21 at 10:07 am to
Open source isn't perfect. There have been cases of bugs being pushed through the review process (that might have been intentional). But it's still better than closed source proprietary crap where the user has no idea what's going on. There are still bugs in Windows that have been there since the 90's. Microsoft acknowledges it but says fixing it would be too hard without a complete rewrite.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram