Linux Mint Website Hacked, Users Tricked Into Downloading ISOs with Backdoors

Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by stapp, Feb 21, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Daveski17, if you want "the original" as you say, then you'd use Debian, which has all the same conveniences as Ubuntu. Mint has taken Ubuntu and added value to that. There is also LMDE (Linux Mint Debian), which is based on Debian. One nice thing Mint has is Cinnamon, which Ubuntu folks don't offer, you have add it via a PPA.

    Bottom line: They all have their advantages and drawbacks. I have used all 3 extensively, and IMO they're all equally good. Just because one distro does it differently than another doesn't make that distro better or worse.
     
  2. Joxx

    Joxx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2012
    Posts:
    1,635
    Exactly.
    The only thing Mint brings to the table is Cinnamon, but that could have been achieved as Cubuntu.
     
  3. MisterB

    MisterB Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    1,248
    Location:
    Southern Rocky Mountains USA
    There seems to be a bit of anti Mint trolling here too with all the talk of "real distros" and "frankenbuild" I have been pointing out that Mint has virtues that have nothing to do with security and that it is more than just Ubuntu with Cinnamon. Just as you can add some extra driver and codec functionality very easily to Ubuntu, you can do the same to enhance security with Mint. Just takes a minute or two.

    With Ubuntu, I have never had it automatically detect and install drivers for both GPUs in my W520 and I've had the graphics broken by updates more than once. I finally got Bumblebee installed after two failed attempts which made the whole system really rock but it was by far the most complicated and difficult driver install I've ever done which involved manually adding repositories, completely purging previously installed Nvidia drivers and manually editing several configuration files. Mint got both GPUs in a portable USB installation that was done for another laptop as well as all the other hardware on the W520 in one very fast boot. That is some very tight, very professional coding that is not just another DE on top of Ubuntu. Yes, drivers are a kernel function but that is not specific to Linux, it applies to all OSes. It is how Mint recognizes the hardware, installs the right drivers on the fly without taking much time to do it that is impressive.
     
  4. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I knew you'd give me the 'original' argument about Debian, but it is a disingenuous argument at best as Ubuntu is much more than just a revamped Debian and Canonical have invested heavily in Ubuntu. You may as well describe me as an Ubuntu fanboy for wanting to use it in preference to Debian. I just want a professionally maintained distro. Mint isn't that and Debian is an unknown quantity to me. I'm not a techie, I just wanted to buy a laptop preinstalled with a reliable and secure distro.

    Ubuntu gave me that. Mint and Debian couldn't.
     
  5. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Oddly, it was Unity that really did it for me, I actually prefer it.
     
  6. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Ok, in what way specifically is Ubuntu "much more than just a revamped Debian"? Have you ever used Debian? I think not. So my "original" comment stands. You said it at the end of your post "Debian is an unknown quantity to me". Exactly.

    I have no beef with Ubuntu, I like it just as much as Mint. But honestly, how can you pretend to criticize Mint, when you've never even installed or tried that either? Just saying... ;)
     
  7. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Yep, everyone has their preferred distros, and some like to just bash anything that isn't their's... Pretty silly...
     
  8. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Canonical have invested financially in Ubuntu in a way that hasn't been done with Debian. Your original comment doesn't stand anywhere, but is sitting down taking a tea break. Specifically; Shuttleworth has invested money in working with OEM's and other companies in a professional and business-like way.

    I can criticise Mint's lack of financial investment, professionalism and lapse security, because it is transparently evident.

    This isn't the school playground, we're not talking about football teams.

    I'm not pretending to do anything. I think Mint and Debian are fine. They just aren't what I want.

    I want a secure, professionally maintained distro that invests in its own development and works with OEM's to promote compatibility and security.

    Ubuntu is that, Mint and Debian aren't. Quod erat demonstrandum.
     
  9. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Well, Daveski17, you were the one who brought up the "original" argument as a reason for using Ubuntu to begin with, so I just pointed out that if that's what you want (original), then you should use Debian. It is THE original for both Ubuntu and Mint.

    Honestly, I think you're just flailing in the wind with your silly comments, none of which show or prove anything about Ubuntu. Certainly you can use whatever you like, but don't try to argue that Ubuntu is better than Debian or Mint when it clearly isn't. People left Ubuntu in droves years ago due to Unity, and the Ubuntu people haven't recovered from that to this day.

    A "financial investment" in a distro doesn't guarantee or prove anything either. I think far more work probably goes into Debian to be honest.

    At any rate, use what you like, but don't try to pretend it's better than the others with silly arguments that hold no water.
     
  10. blacknight

    blacknight Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Posts:
    3,089
    Location:
    Europe, UE citizen
    Thank you. So their MD5 is safe ?
     
  11. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    I would assume/hope so. If not, then we're in trouble! :)
     
  12. blacknight

    blacknight Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2007
    Posts:
    3,089
    Location:
    Europe, UE citizen
    Luckily now I have not Mint installed. But I read something about hash modified, and I don't remember if in Mint download servers or in other.
     
  13. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Canonical have done more with Debian than Mint have done with Ubuntu. I just want the original successful implementation of the Debian base. Which is Ubuntu. Which is what I've got. I'm happy with it.

    I take it you have no real counter-argument when you have to describe mine as 'just flailing in the wind with your silly comments'. Out of the two of us, who is the one making derogatory remarks and who is the one with a valid point?

    Canonical have financially invested in working with OEM's and other companies in a way that Mint or Debian hasn't.

    Which arguments 'hold no water'? For me, Ubuntu is 'better' than Mint and Debian for the reasons I have elucidated previously.

    Whether it is silly or not, I wanted to merely purchase a laptop with a reliable, secure, professionally maintained distro. Ubuntu gave me that, Debian and Mint couldn't. I was familiar with Ubuntu anyway. It was a no brainer.

    P.S. I actually prefer Unity.
     
  14. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    As far as I know, I have not made any derogatory remarks. Maybe you're taking my comments in a way that wasn't intended?

    At any rate, let's end this nonsense now before it gets out of hand. This IS a thread on Mint, not Ubuntu.

    To each his own, right? Cheers! ;)
     
  15. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Well, all I can say is, anything is possible. But if you want to use any distro, then a certain degree of trust is needed, or you won't be able to do anything. After all that has happened, I'm sure that the Mint people are on top of things at this point as far as the ISO and the MD5 goes...
     
  16. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I think it's an inevitability to discuss Ubuntu and Debian on a thread about Mint lol. Perhaps derogatory was too strong an adjective. Like I said, I've got nothing against Mint, but this security problem surrounding it is a perfect example of why I chose Ubuntu over Mint or Debian when I needed a new laptop. My only alternatives to Linux were Win 8 or a MacBook. There is a professionalism with Ubuntu that just isn't there with Mint. My reasoning was simple; if I'm going to spend 500 quid on a laptop running Linux I want the best, most secure, professionally run distro. I still think I made the right choice.
     
  17. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Yeah, that's fine. We all make our choices to suit our needs. I like all 3 of them personally...
     
  18. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I'm sure they're all great in their own way. I just have standards.
     
  19. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    Lol... I wouldn't call it standards... You have *preferences*.... :)
     
  20. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    No, I'd call it standards. They are quite simple:

    I needed a distro that was professionally maintained by an established company that had worked with OEM's and invested financially with them to ensure preinstalled operating system compatibility with the hardware I purchased from an OEM (Levono).

    I needed a distro competently and professionally maintained for security and long term support.

    I needed a distro that was investing financially in the future of its operating system and developing it further for the future.

    Out of Mint, Debian and Ubuntu, only Ubuntu (Canonical) realistically offered that.
     
  21. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    You're still trying to imply that Ubuntu is superior to Mint and Debian, which it isn't. You've used the word "financially" and "professionally" repeatedly, but once again, financial investment in a distro does not guarantee a superior product. You seem to think it does, but I think you're mistakenly drawing that conclusion. There are also thousands of people working on Debian in a "professional" manner as well, probably much more than Ubuntu. I think you're using the financial or money invested in Ubuntu to conclude that this makes it "professional". It does not.

    I agree that the LTS versions of Ubuntu are very good and pretty clean, although I have seen bugs in them. The non-LTS versions are typically a complete bug-fest, as they work out their code and try to polish it for the eventual next LTS release.

    I can see that you have locked onto Ubuntu in a single-minded fashion and that you try to justify and rationalize your decision psychologically with these arguments. I'm afraid your arguments about "financial" and "professional" don't really say much. Why don't you just relax, and say that you LIKE Ubuntu best? Nobody will argue with that. But please, stop trying to imply that Ubuntu is superior. ;)
     
  22. The Red Moon

    The Red Moon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2012
    Posts:
    4,051
    This is the beauty of linux.
    freedom of choice and customisation.No one size fits all and if it did then we would not be having this lively debate.
    Some like ubuntu,some dont.......And so we look at other distros and find what fits our needs best.;)
     
  23. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    9,583
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    It depends on what you mean by superior. Canonical is a reputable company based on the Isle of Man I believe, with its main headquarters in London. I've been to the Isle of Man and London, I know they exist. Likewise I know Canonical exists. I've used Ubuntu on and off for several years. I've been a member of the Ubuntu forums since 2008. Although I know Canonical uses Debian as a base for Ubuntu I know nothing about Mint. I don't know anything about the distributors and compilers of Mint apart from their rather lackadaisical attitude to security.

    It does in the case of Ubuntu when Shuttleworth has invested a lot of money in Ubuntu's development and encouraging OEM's like Lenovo to ensure hardware compatibility. All this development costs money.

    I doubt I'm mistaken, but this does seem to be a bit of a bee in your bonnet for some reason.

    Possibly, but that isn't relevant to my original point about Shuttleworth definitely heavily investing in Ubuntu's development.

    Yes, actually, it does.

    I run Trusty Tahr LTS. There are minor bugs. I can live with that.

    I can see that you seem to be more obsessed about my decision to choose Ubuntu above Mint and Debian than I allegedly am. My decision was based on a logical series of choices based on the information I possessed. It still seems like the right decision to me. I don't need to justify it.

    I don't think I'm the one who's drinking too much coffee here. I'm not implying anything. Based on the criteria of professional standards and company investment Ubuntu was a rational and logical choice over Mint and Debian.

    I'm not implying Ubuntu is superior. I'm stating that out of the three distros only Ubuntu has worked financially with OEM's inter alia to the extent to ensure compatibility and security. Therefore, technically it is superior for me, as it is ensured to be compatible with my Lenovo laptop and as secure an OS as it can possibly be. I just can't state that about Mint or Debian.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2016
  24. oliverjia

    oliverjia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Posts:
    1,903
    LOL, Dave, let's stop feeding the trolls. They consider their opinions as facts, and they can not tell what a Frakenbuild from a real distro, even when the published reference was given to them. They are the ones that refused to open their mind, even after the fact that Mint devs did NOT even realize their forum was hacked one month after the fact. A max 4-digit length password for a forum at this day and age is the biggest joke of Linux history. The worst part is not the fact that the Mint forum was hacked, and malicious ISOs were put up for download; it's Mint devs' philosophy in security that will sure lead to more disaster in the future that scares people away.
     
  25. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    8,003
    @Daveski17 I'll just point out one little thing here regarding investment of money in something. Look at Microsoft and Win 10. Huge investment financially in Windows 10 and professional company and people working on it. But does that make Win 10 great, or even worthy of your consideration? I think not. Also, money invested does not make a product professional. The quality of work that goes into it does... Again, you're confusing money invested with quality of product produced. One does not necessarily lead to the other.

    I'm fine with the fact that you like Ubuntu best. Just don't pretend to tell us that it's superior. There's no need for personal remarks or comments here, that's what you typically resort to when you feel trapped and when you're losing an argument. Your arguments are convincing to you, but I don't buy much of it.

    You say in your last sentence that "technically it is superior". Again, you are wrong.

    Let's just agree that you like Ubuntu and you think it's the best choice for you.... Don't make the mistake of thinking that others think or feel the same... :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.