I set up a quick demonstration to show risks of curl|bash and how a bad-actor could potentially hide a malicious script that appears safe.

It’s nothing new or groundbreaking, but I figure it never hurts to have another reminder.

  • xylogx@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Yes this has risks. At the same time anytime you run any piece of software you are facing the same risks, especially if that software is updated from the internet. Take a look at the NIST docs in software supply chain risks.

    • ShortN0te@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Not completely correct. A lot of updaters work with signatures to verify that what was downloaded is signed by the correct key.

      With bash curl there is no such check in place.

      So strictly speeking it is not the same.

      • xylogx@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Signatures do not help if your distribution infra gets compromised. See Solarwinds and the more recent node.js incidents.

        • axx@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Please tell me you are not seriously equating a highly sophisticated attack line the Solarwind compromise with piping curl to bash?