← Back to context

Comment by brigandish

25 days ago

An alternative:

- copy the dependencies' tests into your own tests

- copy the code in to your codebase as a library using the same review process you would for code from your own team

- treat updates to the library in the same way you would for updates to your own code

Apparently, this extra work will now not be a problem, because we have AI making us 10x more efficient. To be honest, even without AI, we should've been doing this from the start, even if I understand why we haven't. The excuses are starting to wear thin though.

Just going to put features on hold for a month while I review the latest changes to ffmpeg.

  • As you should. Also, the constant complaint from devs on these very boards is that quality and security are relegated behind new features that are often described as useless but pushed by management.

    Are you in management?

I don't know where you've worked but a hostile and intelligent actor or internal red team would succeed under each of those cases at every job I've worked at.

  • Defending against a targeted attack is difficult, yes. But these recent campaigns were all directed at everyone. Auditing and inspecting your dependencies does absolutely help thwart that because there will always be people who don't.

  • They succeeded in poisoning the whole supply chain and making everyone distrust package management to a degree never seen before, and people who aren't reviewing their dependencies are already getting hit. You seem to suggest that we all accept that.

    That attitude might be the reason why the places you've worked would be under threat. The places I've worked would also be under threat, because several of my colleagues had that attitude, and this is why red teaming works.