• fierysparrow89@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    If this will indeed be implemented, that is finally an objectively good reason for the haters. I wonder how distros will deal with this.

    • Railcar8095@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I’m not so technical, but my understanding this won’t be systemd enforcing it, as much as offering a common storage and retrieval method for the Distros.

      Please correct me if mistaken

      • ken@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        You are correct. Similar to how /etc/passwd used in all Linux distros has had mostly neglected “GECOS” field for full name and phone number for decades. I am yet to hear of SMS validation done against such phone numbers.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecos_field

        Why not extend the GECOS field? I haven’t seen the conversation but assuming it has to do with access control. By putting it in passwd/shadow you’re limited by filesystem permissions on the whole file, meaning it becomes impossible or annoying to do selective disclosure to certain user/process without bolting some service similar to what systemd is doing on top.

        Lots of references to discussion and alternative proposals are tracked by Kicksecure/Whonix: https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Age-api

      • fierysparrow89@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        I haven’t looked into this b/c, frankly, this at a low place on my current emergencies list, but sounds plausible.