It is certainly possible, but it is a lot of effort to prevent an admin managing his site(s) for fear that he might be doing something that he shouldn't. Unwanted changes could be detected - but why would any admin want to do that? In any event all of our code is released for the whole world to see. If the idea is to prevent unauthorised access then it is more of a security matter - nobody should be able to access running code or personal data which they should not be accessing.
The database is constantly changing. Every comment, journal, moderation, even page accesses are recorded including UserID, time, the event itself, .... etc. So a blockchain would be of no use there. The daily backups are encrypted and stored on separate servers, both locally and remotely. No blockchain could prevent the deletion of a backup or even just pulling the plug on a server.
The original AC suggested a new OS but seemingly is now reluctant to explain exactly how or why the proposed changes are necessary. While he might be directing his comments at this site in particular, he is suggesting that a new OS would be his ideal. Why? A new OS would not make supporting the perl code any easier. If anyone wants to rewrite it then they are more than welcome to give it a try. kolie has extended the APIs so that we do not need to change the perl code to achieve many new functions - just knowing where to hook into the API is making many enhancements much easier than they once were. Additionally, many have decried the use of Docker containers but they are much more reliable than the previous configuration and the problems tend to be where the original Rehash code was hacked but insufficiently tested before being widely used.
So I don't think that he is directing his comments to this site. But if not, then which sites does he believe his new OS would be better suited than existing ones?
For repos such as those for different languages (Python etc) then a block chain would certainly identify that a 'change' had taken place, but I am not sure that it would accurately identify exactly where and, more importantly, what risks the new code poses to its users. Some have gone to great lengths to obfuscate the real purpose of their code changes and if a block chain could solve all the problems I wonder why nobody has yet introduced such a system for their repos. Perhaps they have, I do not pay much interest to blockchains etc so this is an area about which I know relatively little.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Thursday February 26, @11:18AM
It is certainly possible, but it is a lot of effort to prevent an admin managing his site(s) for fear that he might be doing something that he shouldn't. Unwanted changes could be detected - but why would any admin want to do that? In any event all of our code is released for the whole world to see. If the idea is to prevent unauthorised access then it is more of a security matter - nobody should be able to access running code or personal data which they should not be accessing.
The database is constantly changing. Every comment, journal, moderation, even page accesses are recorded including UserID, time, the event itself, .... etc. So a blockchain would be of no use there. The daily backups are encrypted and stored on separate servers, both locally and remotely. No blockchain could prevent the deletion of a backup or even just pulling the plug on a server.
The original AC suggested a new OS but seemingly is now reluctant to explain exactly how or why the proposed changes are necessary. While he might be directing his comments at this site in particular, he is suggesting that a new OS would be his ideal. Why? A new OS would not make supporting the perl code any easier. If anyone wants to rewrite it then they are more than welcome to give it a try. kolie has extended the APIs so that we do not need to change the perl code to achieve many new functions - just knowing where to hook into the API is making many enhancements much easier than they once were. Additionally, many have decried the use of Docker containers but they are much more reliable than the previous configuration and the problems tend to be where the original Rehash code was hacked but insufficiently tested before being widely used.
So I don't think that he is directing his comments to this site. But if not, then which sites does he believe his new OS would be better suited than existing ones?
For repos such as those for different languages (Python etc) then a block chain would certainly identify that a 'change' had taken place, but I am not sure that it would accurately identify exactly where and, more importantly, what risks the new code poses to its users. Some have gone to great lengths to obfuscate the real purpose of their code changes and if a block chain could solve all the problems I wonder why nobody has yet introduced such a system for their repos. Perhaps they have, I do not pay much interest to blockchains etc so this is an area about which I know relatively little.
[nostyle RIP 06 May 2025]