this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
41 points (97.7% liked)

Privacy Guides

16859 readers
51 users here now

In the digital age, protecting your personal information might seem like an impossible task. We’re here to help.

This is a community for sharing news about privacy, posting information about cool privacy tools and services, and getting advice about your privacy journey.

You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:

Learn more...

Check out our website at privacyguides.org before asking your questions here. We've tried answering the common questions and recommendations there!

Want to get involved? The website is open-source on GitHub, and your help would be appreciated!

This community is the "official" Privacy Guides community on Lemmy, which can be verified here. Other "Privacy Guides" communities on other Lemmy servers are not moderated by this team or associated with the website.

Moderation Rules:

  1. We prefer posting about open-source software whenever possible.
  2. This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
  3. No soliciting engagement: Don't ask for upvotes, follows, etc.
  4. Surveys, Fundraising, and Petitions must be pre-approved by the mod team.
  5. Be civil, no violence, hate speech. Assume people here are posting in good faith.
  6. Don't repost topics which have already been covered here.
  7. News posts must be related to privacy and security, and your post title must match the article headline exactly. Do not editorialize titles, you can post your opinions in the post body or a comment.
  8. Memes/images/video posts that could be summarized as text explanations should not be posted. Infographics and conference talks from reputable sources are acceptable.
  9. No help vampires: This is not a tech support subreddit, don't abuse our community's willingness to help. Questions related to privacy, security or privacy/security related software and their configurations are acceptable.
  10. No misinformation: Extraordinary claims must be matched with evidence.
  11. Do not post about VPNs or cryptocurrencies which are not listed on privacyguides.org. See Rule 2 for info on adding new recommendations to the website.
  12. General guides or software lists are not permitted. Original sources and research about specific topics are allowed as long as they are high quality and factual. We are not providing a platform for poorly-vetted, out-of-date or conflicting recommendations.

Additional Resources:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
41
Secure Operating Systems (Microkernels seems to be the future) (self.privacyguides)
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by SecuMiKern to c/[email protected]
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/17506000

I am not satisfied with Linux's security and have been researching alternative open source OS for privacy and security So far only thing that's ready to use is GrapheneOS (Based on Android) but that's not available on desktop (Though when Android release Desktop mode it may become viable)

Qubes OS is wrapper around underlying operating systems, so it doesn’t really fix for example Linux’s security holes it just kinda sandbox/virtualize them

OpenBSD is more secure than Linux on a base level but lack mitigations and patches that are added to linux overtime and it's security practices while good for it's time is outdated now

RedoxOS (Written in Rust) got some nice ideas but sticks to same outdated practices and doesn't break the wheel too much, and security doesn't seems to be main focus of OS

Haiku and Serenity are outright worse than Linux, especially Haiku as it's single user only

Serenity adopted Pledge and Unveil from OpenBSD but otherwise lacks basic security features

All new security paradigms seems to be happening in microkernels and these are the ones that caught my eyes

None of these are ready to be used as daily driver OS but in future (hopefully) it may change

Genode seems to be far ahead of game than everything else

Ironclad Written in ADA

Atmosphere And Mesosphere Open Source Re-implementation of Nintendo Switch's Horizon OS, I didn't expected this to be security-oriented but seems like Nintendo has done a very solid job

Then there are Managarm, HelenOS, Theseus but I couldn't figure out how secure they are

Finally there is Kicksecure from creators of Whonix, Kicksecure is a linux distro that plans to fix Linux's security problems

if you know of any other OS please share it here

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Iirc microkernels have been the future since before Linux existed. There was a bit of a flame war between Linus and the guy who wrote the MINIX kernel about how being monolithic would be the death of Linux.

GNU Hurd also wanted to show the world how good microkernels could be, but sadly never got off the ground.

I'm not saying microkernels are bad, but I do wonder if there's some reason we don't see them out in the wild much.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

It's likely because of the extra complexity involved in microkernels. Especially like the Hurd, which really didn't take off because it was too ambitious and Linux was finished faster.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

This old fart remembers those discussions from the old Usenet days. You are correct and I agree. These claims are not new.

[–] SecuMiKern 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

More info on Atmosphere as I find it fascinating that an OS created for a gaming device got such tight security:

https://www.reddit.com/r/emulation/comments/hygtnx/mesosphere_opensource_nintendo_switch_kernel_now/

"It is a completely unique microkernel with a cooperative (non-preemptive) scheduler. The kernel is secure -- so far as I can tell (as a reverse engineer and hacker), it has zero security bugs. They throw out years of backwards compatibility (they're not POSIX/UNIX), and they really, really benefit from it from a security and modularity PoV. Horizon's the only meaningful RTOS with a microkernel that I'm aware of (other than Fuschia). Everything's in userland -- filesystems, gpu (and other device drivers). The OS is capability-based and conceptually all about lots of different processes/drivers ("system modules") that host microservices. The fact that Nintendo designed such a rock-solid, modular, custom operating system for their consoles fascinates me."

"IPC is the hottest hot-path in a microkernel, correspondingly Nintendo marked every function involved in IPC as attribute((always_inline)), this was kind of a huge pain to reverse engineer as a result. In addition, Nintendo implemented "SvcReplyAndReceive" as a single system call that allows a microservice server process to reply to and receive a new message in one invocation. That said, there's actually less overhead than you think. Past of why FUSE is slower than a kernel driver for FS is because FUSE has to talk to the kernel to do filesystem stuff, so when you read a file you have your process -> FUSE -> kernel -> hardware. In comparison, on Horizon the kernel is completely uninvolved in filesystem management (it doesn't even have the sdmmc hardware mapped). Thus processes will do process -> FS system module process -> hardware."

"In Horizon, everything is very distinctly not a file. There's no global filesystem paths the way that unix/linux have special /dev/whatever. Pipes don't exist in Horizon -- all IPC is done via the horizon ipc ("HIPC") protocol. UNIX/POSIX have stuff like fork() and child processes...but creating a process is an incredibly privileged operation in a capability-based operating system. Fork() is impossible to implement in Horizon, all threads are created via SvcCreateThread() instead. Child processes aren't a thing that exist."

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

well, doesn't it make sense when the business-model is to recoup R&D cost of the console with expensive games?
DRM becomes much harder once you can't trust the system anymore.

Nintendo tried to lock the system down, and got fucked by NVIDIA.

[–] SecuMiKern 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I didn't know Nintendo subsidize their hardware like Sony and Microsoft, as their hardware seemed overpriced to me for what they offer

And small percentage of gamers are on PC and even smaller percentage would emulate games, even without exclusives most casual gamers seem to prefer consoles so I think Nintendo is overreacting in that aspect though for pirating/jailbreaking switch devices themselves yeah maybe that's why Nintedo care

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Who is subsidising it? You mean a loss-leader?
Previous consoles have been loss-leaders, the original switch isnt. Im not sure about the new gen switch, but considering the success of the first one, i doubt it is.

The manufacturer’s suggested retail price in the U.S. is $299.99. As we have stated before, unlike Wii U, the Nintendo Switch price point was set to ensure that the hardware is not basically sold at a loss

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2017/170201_2e.pdf page 15

[–] SecuMiKern 1 points 7 months ago

I meant Sony and Micorsoft were selling Playstation and Xbox at loss, profiting from games instead

Nintendo doesn't seem to be selling their Hardware at loss so probably profits from hardware, actually considering their hardware (which is weaker than even midrange android phones) they probably sell at good profit margin

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I feel like a lot of this is driven by a bias towards the unknown. You don't know all the security issues in something new or even something old that doesn't get the same level of testing as Linux.

I would trust security hardened Linux over all of the suggestions any day of the week. Better the devil you know.

[–] SecuMiKern 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

While that's true for mitigations, one system can be more secure than another by design

Things like an OS that's designed with sandboxing, more clean codebase that's auditable, permissions, ... in mind is more secure than an OS that later adds them as an afterthought

Or at least if added later they should be done properly

iOS and Android are way more secure than Linux (And no Android isn't just linux) cause they were designed in much later era with better security practices in mind

Even MacOS and Windows's security are objectively better than linux's even though they started with same security mindset, the problem is they are not open source

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Those things were “added later” to create iOS and Android, they aren’t from scratch systems. iOS especially shares a large portion of its code base with macOS (much of which is open source).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I think we have different definitions of security. Your definition may be more theoretically secure, in your mind, for the novel and interesting solutions. My definition is about a hardened, time-tested solution.

[–] csm10495 1 points 7 months ago

The idea of a clean code base only existed for the original writers.. most of the time.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Linux is secure, skill issues if you disagree