Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

No clue personally, but the author is prolific enough here that I thought it merited posting.


I go with three paths out.

1. it consumes too much systems resources. So its net-negative impact on the system under observation

2. it's misleading and leads to false diagnoses of situations under review

3. she's under an NDA of some kind related to a CVE or some other high class risk which will come out in due course but she felt a burden to stop people being exposed to risk.

4. I can't count and there are 4, 5, 6 other reasons but these 3 are mine.


If it was 1 or 2, there would be a long Rachel-style post ranting about it and explaining exactly why.

It has to be 3.

And she knows her stuff, so I'm listening. Luckily we don't use atop.


But if it was 3, why not say "I know there is a vulnerability, but I can't share the details"?

I'm not saying it isn't 3, but if it is, it seems like there might be more to it than a run-of-the-mill CVE.

Or maybe she doesn't know of a specific vulnerability/backdoor but has some reason to be suspicious there might be.


I'll go with number 3. She didn't just say "don't run", she said "uninstall". That doesn't sound like "misleading" or "uses too much resources". It sounds very CVE-ish.


"uninstall" points at a very specific type of exploit.


Assuming it's actually necessary to uninstall.

It might just be that "uninstall" is the simplest one-word advice you can give that will definitely solve the problem.


Another xz case?


That's what it smells like but this is still a weird way to disclose something like that. I imagine some people with free afternoons are taking a stab at auditing atop's PR history right now. I'm not personally up to the task, but the fact that the top 3 contributors other than the original author are ByteDance employees might cause some to jump to conclusions.


Does atop have any legitimate need to connect to the network? I can’t think of any legitimate accidental security holes that might show up in something like atop, but then, these utilities often have funky features I don’t know about!


1) is possible because it uses some interesting options like nice/mlockall/changing its oom score so if the atop process went out of control your box would probably be fucked.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: