Linux.com: The Ramifications of Binary Distribution

“In recent months, a fast transition has been made, away from
the traditional source distribution of software using tarballs
towards a more “user-friendly” approach — that of binary packages
destined for use on a specific platform. Debian, Red Hat, SuSE, and
Slackware all have their means of packaging software; thousands of
discrete packages that make up a typical Linux distribution are
compiled beforehand for a certain platform, put into a package, and
set up to fit within the framework of a particular distribution of
Linux (with its program dependencies, software and device
requirements, and so on).”

“Binary packages are convenient, and relatively trivial to set
up properly. They are the preferred format in most arenas due to
their relatively small size, and their ease of installation and
administration, especially when dependencies are set up properly
and easily accessible. Binary package software is quite nice
when properly set up. Still, there are several problems with
it. First, when software is primarily distributed in
non-source format, there is an increased chance of catching and
spreading virii from system to system. While there are, at this
time, all of three or four documented Linux viruses, none of which
have been found “in the wild,” the possibility that the number of
careless people reaches the critical mass needed to support the
spread and continuation of a virus in the wild increases
correspondingly with the number of Linux users.”

“More immediate, however, is the possibility of trojans. In the
worst case scenario, the possibility of malicious code infecting
one of the primary Debian mirror sites, and then being distributed
quickly and efficiently to any of thousands or hundreds of
thousands of machines is a scary thing to consider, especially with
the existing web of trust in place. This isn’t paranoid
fear-mongering….”

Complete
Story