On 10/25/11 5:11 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> And "Debian is doing it" or whatever isn't actually a bad reason to
> consider this.  When Debian does something by default, it means that
> upstream packages will take notice.

Right, I was thinking about the change for a long time, but if Debian,
which advertises itself as stable and well-tested, thinks it's time to
do it, then why should we stay behind?

My primary motivation is doing the right thing, and linking to Debian's
plans is one of my points to show that it makes sense.

I think that generally just trying to patch detected vulnerabilities as
soon as possible is not sufficient to stay reasonably secure. Mitigation
techniques like SSP and ASLR are really important, because they give you
more time to fix vulnerabilities (by making it harder to exploit them).

And again, I don't suggest enabling anything by default that would
degrade performance in an unacceptable way or create compatibility
problems that can't be solved. And I'm also looking for a way that will
provide a seamless upgrade path for existing users (i.e. one that
doesn't break them).