Mostly pretty positive actually, having some reasonable assurances that you’re actually running the software that you think you’re running seems like an obvious thing you would want.
It didn’t even add that. You can put custom fields into userdb. It just standardized that, right next to other standard optional fields like full name.
Out of all the steps that happened, this one should be the least controversial, but some people see systemd and start the heavy breathing.
I found it extremely funny when people started asking for systemd replacements, of all things, after systemd added the ability to store a birth date.
The author of the PR explicitly says IT IS TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW TRACKING LAW (LOBBIED BY FACEBOOK/META).
Yeah so Lennart Poettering is on the Executive team of Amutable (https://amutable.com/about), how do we feel about that? Remind me again how the open source community feels about trusted computing … https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html
Mostly pretty positive actually, having some reasonable assurances that you’re actually running the software that you think you’re running seems like an obvious thing you would want.
Here’s an example of this in practice: https://grapheneos.org/features#auditor.
But I’m sure you know best. Time to cancel GrapheneOS.
“Replacements”?
We already had loads of those.
And then…
Boom! An explosion of systemd forks since the age “verification”(/attestation) merge and lennart’s blocking of the reversion pull request. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/forks?include=active&page=1&period=1mo&sort_by=last_updated
It didn’t even add that. You can put custom fields into userdb. It just standardized that, right next to other standard optional fields like full name.
Out of all the steps that happened, this one should be the least controversial, but some people see systemd and start the heavy breathing.