Yes, Ubuntu Is Withholding Security Patches for Some Software
Open link in next tab
flu0r1ne.net
https://www.flu0r1ne.net/logs/ubuntu_withholding_universe_security_patches
https://www.flu0r1ne.net/logs/ubuntu_withholding_universe_security_patches
There are plenty of reasons to get rid of Ubuntu, but this isn't one of them.
Before Ubuntu Pro, packages in universe (and multiverse) were not receiving (security) updates at all, unless someone from the community stepped up and maintained the package. Now Canonical provides security updates for universe, for the first time since Ubuntu has been introduced, via Ubuntu Pro, which is free for up to five personal devices and paid for all other use cases.
Debian is actually not that different (anymore). If you read the release notes of Debian 12, you'll notice that quite a few package groups are excluded from guaranteed security updates, just like packages in universe are in Ubuntu. Unlike Ubuntu, Debian doesn't split its package repository by security support though.
via Ubuntu Pro, which is free for up to five personal devices and paid for all other use cases
this stinks a lot like red hat's early days.
we know how that turned out.
Looks like Canonical is trying to sell me security updates I would be getting for free on Debian.
Debian 12 likely isn't that different, but I don't want to follow a Debian 11 setup guide then run into issues.
This has always been the case with Ubuntu. Ubuntu only ever supported its main repository with security updates. Now they offer (paid) support for the universe repository in addition, which is a bonus for Ubuntu users, as they now have a greater selection of packages with security updates.
If you don't opt-in to use Ubuntu Pro, nothing changes and Ubuntu will be as secure (or insecure) as it has always been. If you disable universe and multiverse you have a Ubuntu system where all packages receive guaranteed security updates for free.
Please note: I still don't recommend Ubuntu due to snapd not supporting third-party repositories, but that's no reason not to get the facts right.
Debian has always been the better choice if you required security updates for the complete package repository.
Personally I have my doubts if Debian actually manages to reliably backport security updates for all its packages. Afterall Eclipse was stuck on version 3.8 for multiple Debian releases due to lack of a maintainer ...
debian's repo is massive. there are holes here and there from time-to-time as is likely the case in any distro--paid updates or not.
Thank you for the information.
I'll still be going with Debian because Ubuntu keeps telling me I have 2 security updates locked behind their paywall.
Because the updates are not anyone "trying to sell me security updates I would be getting for free on Debian."
Really? Which part isn't true, the selling me updates or that they're available on Debian?
Come on man, use your words lol.
It is entirely untrue. Where as you made the claim, and I am merely calling you a liar while making no claim of my own, it would seem that you must prove your claim with say a sales promotion or some other solicitation plus a credible report that these updates would otherwise exist without the charge from those whose business use case depends upon them.
If you wish to hate upon ubuntu do so, but don't lie about it.
security updates I would be getting for free on Debian.
Debian contrib doesn't get official security updates, the same as Ubuntu universe. https://www.debian.org/security/faq#contrib
In both Debian and Ubuntu, only the main repo gets official security updates for free. Ubuntu has a paid option for universe whereas Debian doesn't have that option and relies on the package maintainer to provide any updates.
I'd still recommend Debian over Ubuntu though, for various reasons.
Definitely on Debian, and I think on Ubuntu too.
Package maintainers can be slow to update packages though. Debian have a separate security team that get patches out ASAP, and those packages go into a separate security repo. I imagine Ubuntu does the same. It's that security team that only deals with "official" packages, meaning anything that's not in contrib, non-free, or non-free-firmware.
To me, it looks like Debian and Ubuntu are both secure but you have to pay extra to make Ubuntu at least as secure as Debian.
What you're paying extra for are timely security updates for community-maintained packages that aren't an official part of the OS. Debian doesn't provide that for free either. Debian doesnt provide it at all since they don't have any paid options.
No. All the official packages in the main repo get security updates from the Debian security team.
Only the packages in contrib, non-free and non-free-firmware don't have official security updates and rely on the package maintainers. These are not considered part of the Debian distro, and I don't even have them enabled on my servers.
Out-of-the-box, Debian only enables the main repo, plus the non-free-firmware one if any of your devices require it (e.g. Nvidia graphics, Realtek Bluetooth, etc). You have to manually enable contrib and non-free, and by doing that, it's assumed you know what you're doing.
In the case of non-free and non-free-firmware, they can be closed source software (like the Nvidia drivers) or have a non-open-source license that doesn't allow distributing modified versions. In those cases, the Debian team is unable to patch them even if they wanted to.