Why does OpenSSH not conform with XDG_CONFIG? Can there be alternatives?
Why does OpenSSH not conform with XDG_CONFIG? Can there be alternatives?
So the Arch Linux Wiki page you shared actually had a source, but the OpenSSH maintainers hid it because it got brigaded (if I had to guess, by this Hacker News post). Anyways, here’s the latest archive (I also edited the wiki to include it), it’s a BS reason: web.archive.org/web/…/show_bug.cgi?id=2050
Please support FreeDesktop.org XDG basedir specification for openssh
No.
OpenSSH (and it’s ancestor ssh-1.x) have a 17 year history of using ~/.ssh. This location is baked into innumerable users’ brains, millions of happily working configurations and countless tools.
Changing the location of our configuration would require a very strong justification and following a trend of desktop applications (of which OpenSSH is not) is not sufficient.
Please notice that backward compatibility can be preserved by continue to use ~/.ssh if it exits but using/creating XDG dirs if it is not exist.
So tools and users need to hunt in two places for configuration that has security ramifications? That makes it even less palatable…
They are not BS reasons, they are just reasons you don’t like. The OpenBSD team - those behind OpenSSH - are very conservative to the point of being almost reactionary, and that’s great for the kind of software they make. OpenBSD defines itself as “boring”, in a good way.
Coming from a Linux world it may seem weird, as around Linux innovation is praised more than improvement so we end up with a bunch of shiny new software with a lot of growing pains, while BSDs tend to be avantgarde on some technical aspects but at the same time very wary of novelty. OpenBSD in particular takes this to the next level with most of development still happening on CVS and many other quirks that would baffle most Linux users.
To each their own. Personally when it’s security stuff I like it boring. I’ve been using openssh since version 2.x and the muscle memory built 20 years ago is still serving me.
It's not BS. It's correct.
You're proposing an obscene security hole for no benefit.