mikshaw
Group: Members
Posts: 4856
Joined: July 2004 |
|
Posted: May 09 2006,05:08 |
|
Quote (clacker @ May 05 2006,18:08) | I thought it might have been because *.tar.gz extensions were supposed to be safer that the regular dsl ones, but apparently there isn't a check for that. |
I'd say tar.gz and uci are "safer" than dsl, simply because they don't access most of the base system. However, these safer packages can still easily cause the complete destruction of your OS if created by a malicious fiend and not checked by the user. For example, bootlocal.sh could be replaced by something that causes lots of damage next time you boot. Or more immediately, .bashrc could be replaced by a different script that would run the next time you opened bash. Poof, there goes all your data.
-------------- http://www.tldp.org/LDP/intro-linux/html/index.html
|