Does the Puppy's Security Model Still Make Sense in 2021?

For discussions about programming, and for programming questions and advice


Moderator: Forum moderators

Post Reply
sonny
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 449 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Does the Puppy's Security Model Still Make Sense in 2021?

Post by sonny »

This question was originally asked back in 2013:

https://unix.stackexchange.com/question ... -sense/8#8

darry19662018
Posts: 453
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:24 am
Has thanked: 54 times
Been thanked: 65 times

Re: Does the Puppy's Security Model Still Make Sense in 2021?

Post by darry19662018 »

Puppy Linux's use of the unionfs/aufs stacking file systems keep all but recently altered files on read-only layers. This provides an "undo" capability that allows easier restoration of the entire system to a known-good condition. As a last resort, the original system as distributed is kept on the bottom read-only layer where it can be rebooted to while preserving subsequent changes on the upper layers.

One of the reasons I prefer Puppy in a frugal install environment and if I am say super worried about exploits (I am not), then I have the choice to not save any changes and run a fresh copy of Puppy each time it is booted up with no savefile or savefolder same with the Dogs. Try doing that with the "Big Boy" Distros where running as a normal user is supposed to protect you from exploits.

Please read the following thread very interesting reading.

viewtopic.php?f=54&t=1583

sonny
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2021 4:50 pm
Has thanked: 449 times
Been thanked: 163 times

Re: Does the Puppy's Security Model Still Make Sense in 2021?

Post by sonny »

darry19662018 wrote: Sat Jun 12, 2021 3:54 am

Puppy Linux's use of the unionfs/aufs stacking file systems keep all but recently altered files on read-only layers. This provides an "undo" capability that allows easier restoration of the entire system to a known-good condition. As a last resort, the original system as distributed is kept on the bottom read-only layer where it can be rebooted to while preserving subsequent changes on the upper layers.

One of the reasons I prefer Puppy in a frugal install environment and if I am say super worried about exploits (I am not), then I have the choice to not save any changes and run a fresh copy of Puppy each time it is booted up with no savefile or savefolder same with the Dogs. Try doing that with the "Big Boy" Distros where running as a normal user is supposed to protect you from exploits.

Please read the following thread very interesting reading.

viewtopic.php?f=54&t=1583

As far as I experience, an option not to save (PUPMODE=13) is only applicable to any changes made or happened in the "GUI" mode (i.e. PPM). If we install a package thru terminal, it's persistent.

User avatar
8Geee
Posts: 376
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:52 pm
Location: N.E. USA
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 56 times

Re: Does the Puppy's Security Model Still Make Sense in 2021?

Post by 8Geee »

Well, the "old skool" method still is relevant, albeit using a DVD for larger pups. Run Puppy off the CD/DVD. Shutdown/NO save when done. Nonetheless, make some shanges to the browser like no autocomplete/look-ahead, and make duckduckgo the default search, removing all others. Addons like uBlock, ClearURL, and CSSexfil are still needed while on-line.

8Geee

Money talks... no, it shouts, so that it doesn't have to hear common sense.

Post Reply

Return to “Programming”