I only discovered this recently, and it’s very handy.

Piping scripts directly to bash is a security risk. You can always download the scripts, inspect them and run locally if you so choose.

  • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    18 days ago

    Piping scripts directly to bash is a security risk. You can always download the scripts, inspect them and run locally if you so choose.

    This entire trend needs to die. Package managers exist. Use them. Shun and shame sites that promote shell script installers.

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        Yeah - it’s remarkable that I receive pushback about it. I guess it’s down to the technical immaturity of your average home-gamer vs. people who support Linux systems for a living?

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          16 days ago

          Of course, Linux sysadmin needs linux to remain a ceaseless whirlpool of busywork, that’s what they’re paid for. Imagine having a tool that cuts the bullshit out of using linux, it would put them right out of business if the users could just do the things they want to do without having to beg the middleman.

    • HybridSarcasm@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      Apples and oranges.

      Package managers only install a package with defaults. These helper scripts are designed to take the user through a final config that isn’t provided by the package defaults.

      No need to be elitist about such things.

      EDIT: this particular repo is highly regarded in the community. It is very akin to the AUR. It’s not some haphazard collection of scripts.

      • frongt@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        17 days ago

        No, package installers support configuration. Plenty of packages (e.g. postfix) prompt for configuration at install time.

    • burghler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      Heellll no, the scripts are publically available to read over if you’re sketched out. They save you so much time to actually get to using the service. 98% of my homelab is from these same helper scripts too.

      RIP tteck

      • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        I don’t like that an adversary could modify that link or its contents without much detection or any logging.

        When you compare it to package managers that have immutable versioning that’s a big downfall. If someone were modifying pypi or npm packages I would be surprised if it went undetected.

        Realistically is that an issue, probably not. But I do try and reduce my exposure when I can.

      • non_burglar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Have you ever looked at what was once ttek scripts? They’re a spaghetti of calls to other scripts. It’s not pretty. And not intuitive to audit.

        • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          16 days ago

          They work so what is your objection ?
          If you are worried pipe it into chatgpt with the prompt
          “tell me why this script is safe to use”

          • non_burglar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 days ago

            I thought I was being clear that I have audited some of the scripts. They are built referencing other scripts instead of functions, and these rely on URLs. It’s difficult to follow.

            Don’t ask chatgpt to audit code.

    • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 days ago

      There is no functional difference to piping a script vs running an AUR or other user repository install.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      I asked repository maintainers and they said “LXC is not for apps” and of course docker is a good way to waste your weekends. So we don’t have repositories, we have scripts.

      If you disagree, go tell them

      https://discuss.linuxcontainers.org/t/where-can-i-find-the-biggest-lxc-container-repository/14946

      Until then, people who have sacrificed enough of their weekend to the linux gods will be pipe internet text into their root consoles

      • atzanteol@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Until then, people who have sacrificed enough of their weekend to the linux gods will be pipe internet text into their root consoles

        “I’ll do what’s easy even if it’s not good” is a terrible approach to, well, anything. I would expect people in this community to look for guidance on what the best way to do things is. Seems I’m wrong.