this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2023
805 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
37712 readers
274 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
@TheBaldness
No. Static libraries are a security risk.
@wet_lettuce
Isn't this what updates are for? maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by static libraries.
@TheBaldness
When you bundle everything for an app inside a self-contained directory, it's no different than static linking a binary.
An exploit in a library the package links against means that application is still vulnerable even if the same library on the operating system has been updated to fix the security flaw.
Apple managed to do it for a long time. I imagine they update the app more frequently than they would otherwise.
@TheBaldness
For apps that Apple controls that may be fine, but most people do not get their apps from a single vendor and not all vendors are fast at pushing updates.