http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=59079 --- Comment #8 from Zeb Figura <z.figura12(a)gmail.com> --- (In reply to actium from comment #7)
(In reply to Zeb Figura from comment #6)
Isn't "dedicated server use, where OS security support is a hard requirement" kind of inherently at odds with a very new feature like ntsync?
I do (naively) presume that ntsync doesn't increase the overall system attack surface, particularly facing the internet.
It does increase the attack surface, actually. Not to the internet specifically, but it adds a new world-accessible API window into the kernel. That's not the only criterion one should use to decide, of course. One can decide what they're willing to accept, and that won't always align perfectly with one side or the other of a stable/unstable release cycle. But I also am personally kind of confused at wanting to run Debian Stable but also backport a new and risky feature like ntsync [and new Wine, for that matter.] As the author of ntsync, if I was that concerned about security I definitely wouldn't do that. If you want security then don't pick ntsync, or bleeding-edge Wine. If you aren't that concerned about security/stability then just run Testing. If you want a mix of the two, well, that's gonna have to be on the user to manage, at some point. It's not that hard anyway, given that linked page on the Debian wiki. (I'm amused at that meme, though I find it funny that they chose to portray me as Victoria. I mean, Elizabeth is right there. Two of them!) -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.