Hardening Mint

[email protected]

Windows refugee here. I'm planning to move to Linux Mint but want to make sure I don't do something stupid, as I'm unfamiliar with the Linux operating system.

I found this link with 10 tips to secure Mint.

Is this a good list? Anything else I should do to secure a Mint install?

Thanks for helping a noob!

[email protected]

That's actually a fairly solid guide/list.

I've been running Mint MATE since 2017, good solid OS in my book

Advice: Try to stick with LTS distros (Long Term Support).

[email protected]

Do not allow http or ftp traffic as this guide suggests, unless you are active as a server for your local network on those particular ports, and you are behind a NAT firewall that your router usually provides.

I love that Mint brings people to Linux, but its users write some silly guides sometimes.

[email protected]

Don't forget UBlock Origin and being smart on the web and install programs through the software center

[email protected]

For another view on installing antivirus software on Linux, see this: https://easylinuxtipsproject.blogspot.com/p/security.html?m=1#ID1.1

[email protected]

GNU-Linux hardening is useless

https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html#hardening

[email protected]

Therefore, we should not take any security measures at all?

[email protected]

In the opensuse TW installer you can adjust policykit and SELinux with strict enforcement

[email protected]

Not that the author is necessarily off-base, but that blog post is almost three years old. Tech and software evolve fast, and I would hazard a guess that at least a few of their gripes have been addressed by now. Additionally, due partly to the success of the Steam Deck, Valve has officially partnered with Arch and it's throwing some of their considerable resources into Linux development.

I also noticed that they barely mentioned SELinux or AppArmor, and they probably didn't know about immutable distros (which didn't really exist, yet). It's fair to say that Linux isn't the gold standard of good security, but the post reads like someone with a beef and not someone trying to inform by presenting a skeptic's take (indeed, they seem to gush over Windows and MacOS).

They finish by name-dropping a few people with a vested interest in security, and they're practically begging the question in doing so. If the facts don't stand on their own as the author has presented, why should I listen to strangers who allegedly share the same opinion? That's not how consensus is formed.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, an old article about the state of Linux Security should be assessed within a modern context if we're to apply it to current software.

[email protected]

Is this a good list?

The link definitely provides some good info. It's better than nothing. However, it may or may not fall short based on how secure you'd like to make your system.

Anything else I should do to secure a Mint install?

What is it you're trying to protect and from whom? Whenever the topic of security comes up, one simply can't engage meaningfully without mentioning a threat model.

In this case, I'll assume you're just your average Joe. And, depending on how you engage with your system, Linux Mint might be fit from the get-go. However, if you actively engage in downloading random jank from the internet and have 'survived' with the help of Microsoft Defender Antivirus, then you should know that a safety net as such doesn't exist over on this side. Sure, security through obscurity might save your ass a couple of times. But it's inevitably a losing battle.

So, without knowing your threat model, note the following important advice that the article somehow hasn't touched upon:

Know that you, the user, are the largest attack surface. Even if some distros like Fedora and openSUSE (with the latter AFAIK scoring the best^[1]^ according to Lynis) actually put in great work to offer pretty secure systems, they absolutely won't be able to protect you against yourself.

It's important to mention that this excludes security-first distros like Kicksecure and secureblue. Nor is Qubes OS considered as it's technically not even a Linux distro. Other distros like Tails or Whonix are also not considered as they're not meant to be used as daily drivers and/or for general use.

[email protected]

GNU-Linux hardening is useless

This opinion isn't shared by the author in their actions, as they are known for their contributions to Whonix; both as a security researcher (by their own admission) and (are to this day accredited) as a developer.

[email protected]

Hardening is not useless, but it doesnt fix the architectural issues with Linux and its outdated threat model. That article says the same thing. It isnt an all-or-nothing situation, hardening still improves Linux security. Projects exist like SELinux, Bubblewrap, Crablock, Sydbox, and Landlock. Efforts to harden GNU/Linux have been made, like Kicksecure (Debian) and Secureblue (Fedora Silverblue), which protect against many threat vectors, but not perfect obviously.

[email protected]

The only way I know to harden Linux Mint is using the Debian edition. Using LMDE, you can (unofficial) use Kicksecure to harden the base system. This isnt a great solution since the Linux Mint software is untested with Kicksecure and may/will reduce the security of the overall hardening.

[email protected]

Thanks. I take it that software centre is like a Linux app store?

[email protected]

Thanks for the reply. I'm fairy average Joe. I'll mainly use this machine for downloading files and general browsing. I don't have any personal files or accounts on that device.

I'm mainly concerned with neglecting to enable (or disabling) something critical or accidentally downloading something malicious (although this hasn't happened for many many years).

[email protected]

Escaping Bubblewrap sandbox

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVEJTAFAgH0

[email protected]

Thanks for the clarification!

If you trust both the source and the file, then downloading by itself shouldn't constitute a problem. Supply-chain attacks are still possible, but that's a hard problem to solve anyways. I suppose I'd only trust Qubes OS to handle that gracefully.

For general browsing, GrapheneOS-folk would advice against Firefox(-based browsers). Instead, they'd recommend (something based on) Chromium. Personally, I do follow that advice. But I understand if you'd like to stick to Firefox(-based browsers).

Coming back to Linux Mint, I won't go over my (personal) qualms with the security model of the distros it's based on. But as Linux Mint offers one of the best onboarding experiences, it would be a disservice to lead you elsewhere. Become comfortable with Linux through it. And, perhaps one day, if you feel like venturing elsewhere, you can try out distros that offer better security. Thankfully, Linux Mint's OOTB security should be sufficient until then.

As for the article, everything except for the fourth recommendation is a W. Utilizing ClamAV could be cool, but it's based on a very naive understanding. You wouldn't want an untrusted file on your system in the first place. Obviously, a lot more mileage^[1]^ is possible. But one has to learn to walk before they can run .

Note that the information and instructions found on the excellent ArchWiki often work on and/or apply to other distros as well.

[email protected]

That's exactly right

[email protected]

Don't concern yourself with hardening.

Just use your computer like you normally would, solving issues as your encounter them.

[email protected]

Mint is fairly secure by default.

That said, nothing listed in the article is bad for your security, all pieces of advice do make sense in certain scenarios, but this is generally considered an overkill for home use.

If you're an average user, don't bother yourself with it.

agnos.is Forums

Hardening Mint