Ubuntu’s current LTS version (24.04) contains ffmpeg version 7:6.1.1-3ubuntu5 which has this buffer overflow vulnerability:

https://trac.ffmpeg.org/ticket/10952

https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2024-32230

On my only Ubuntu computer, my update widget says that I need to upgrade to ffmpeg version 7:6.1.1-3ubuntu5+esm2 but can only only do so with Ubuntu Pro. I’m not eligible for Ubuntu Pro.

Ubuntu claims that 24.04 is currently fully supported, and should have complete security updates. However, they seem to have paywalled this security update.

What should I do?

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      153·
      9 months ago

      My issue is that I don’t want to have to register for shit like that. If it’s security related, and it’s a free Linux distro (e.g. not RHEL, etc), it is absolutely not appropriate to diminish anonymity in exchange for those updates, or to paywall them.

      • Rogue@feddit.uk
        5·
        9 months ago

        It’s hardly diminishing your anonymity. There are plenty of services to create an anonymous email account.

    • warrenson@lemmy.nz
      1·
      9 months ago

      Thanks for the info, I’d seen the pro option but just assumed I didn’t want it, like pretty much everything thing else labelled “pro”.

    • commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
      99·
      9 months ago

      However, Ubuntu started a service called Ubuntu Pro / ESM that provides updates for packages in universe.

      Since it’s all free software, what gives Ubuntu the privilege to restrict these updates behind paywalls and signups?

      Pro is also free for personal use on up to 5 machines, so there’s no reason not to enable it.

      Fuck that bullshit. We shouldn’t be encouraging or enabling this behavior at all.

      • Noa Himesaka@lemmy.funami.tech
        18·
        9 months ago

        GPL does not restrict you from selling the software, though you can’t stop getting distributed by someone who bought it. Even RMS himself sold Emacs back in the day.

        EDIT: I’m not saying it’s justified in moral sense, I think it sucks ass. But it’s not against the license.

        • commander@lemmings.worldEnglish
          24·
          9 months ago

          GPL does not restrict you from selling the software

          Oh god, we know.

          Practically speaking though, if anyone can redistribute it for free then it’s available for free.

          • Steve Dice@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            You don’t seem to understand the difference between free as in freedom and free as in beer that is literally the cornerstone of the free software community.