Re: Why you might want packages not containers for Ceph deployments

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> The security issue (50 containers -> 50 versions of openssl to patch)
> also still stands — the earlier question on this list (when to expect
> patched containers for a CVE affecting a library)

I assume they use the default el7/el8 as a base layer, so when that is updated, you will get the updates. However redeploying tasks is not the same as just giving them a restart.

> is still unreplied to[1], so these are real-life concerns. In general, I
> don't know any project which ever managed to keep up with the workload
> caused by the requirement to follow
> all CVEs of all dependencies, informing about them and patching them,
> since this is a workload comparable to the one the security teams of
> Linux distributions have to handle.

Indeed this is the core business of a distro that you choose. No software solution should ever make it theirs. Eg. this DCOS is just a binary blob of a centos release, from which you have no idea if it is up to date or not, I do not get why people install it.

> 
> Cheers (and congratulations to all who made it to the end of this mail),

I think your text clearly summarizes the point of view of many here.

_______________________________________________
ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@xxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-leave@xxxxxxx




[Index of Archives]     [Information on CEPH]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Ceph Development]     [Ceph Large]     [Ceph Dev]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [xfs]


  Powered by Linux