Hi guys, I’ve been working on a self-hostable web analytics platform since the start of this year after being frustrated with Google Analytics and Plausible.

I’ve packed a bunch of cool web analytics features into Rybbit, but I’ve tried very hard to keep the interface simple to use,

https://github.com/rybbit-io/rybbit

Check it out!

  • quick_snail@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 hour ago

    Checksums are not for security. You need signatures. I’m not making claims that aren’t clearly documented.

    • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      You’re talking about authorship. Sure. But if you verify the container yourself as secure and pin the digest, what’s the issue?

        • partofthevoice@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          39 minutes ago

          You’re making big claims on security here, like “cannot be done,” and each time you do I feel like we’re talking past each other a bit. I never claimed you can verify that the person who pushed the container had access to a private key file. I claimed you can verify the security of a container, specifically by auditing it and reviewing the publisher’s online presence. Best practices. Don’t upgrade right away, and pin digests to those which can be trusted.

          When you pin a digest, you’re not going to get a container some malicious agent force pushed after the fact. You pinned the download to an immutable digest, so hot-swapping the container is out the window. What, as I understand, you’re concerned with is the scenario that a malicious actor (1) compromised the registry login beforehand, (2) you pinned the digest after hand, and (3) the attack is unnoticed by you and everyone else.

          I’m trying to figure out under what conditions this would actually occur, and thus justifies the claim that docker pull is insecure. In a work setting, I only see this being an issue if the process to test/upgrade existing ones is already an insecure process. Can you help me understand why I should believe that, even with best practices in place, Dockers own insecurities are unacceptable? Docker is used everywhere and I’m reluctant to believe everyone just doesn’t care about an unmanageable attack vector.