André Arko

> I'd recommend to people to wait for a response https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/

So here's a real-world case of where this actually does matter: https://andre.arko.net/2018/10/25/parsing-logs-230x-faster-with-rust/ two minor follow-ups on that as well: * https://andre.arko.net/2019/01/11/parsing-logs-faster-with-rust-contin… * https://andre.arko.net/2022/03/13/parsing-logs-faster-with-rust-revisi…

> Because people who use command lines / open source software generally have better judgement about this sort of thing Why do we need an instruction on downloading the source to begin with? It really just promotes bad habits with those who know no better, i.e. new/inexperienced developers. The problem is when people see instructions like that on 20% of the guides they read in earnest, trusting that everything is OK if enough people say it. One hopes they stumble upon a discussion like this so that they can consider the consequences but that just isn't going to happen to everyone. True, one should exercise equal caution while cloning, gem-ing[1], etc. It would be great if authors would just link to the source and paste the relevant lines from the README if necessary. [1] http://andre.arko.net/2013/03/29/rubygems-openssl-and-you/

With that interpretation Marty Haught attempted to incite a federal crime on Oct 3rd, where he tried to trick Arko into doing trial logins: https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/ "Please confirm that you cannot access the Ruby Central AWS root account credentials, either through the console or by access keys." Alternatively, we could see the whole issue for what it is: a power struggle between political factions of an open source project that is unprofessionally handled by at least one side.

The response to that: https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/

This is only a win for Ruby Central. They haven't conceded anything and they've convinced Ruby Core to endorse them as the correct and true maintainers of RubyGems. > While repository ownership has moved, Ruby Central will continue to share management and governance responsibilities for RubyGems and Bundler in close collaboration with the Ruby core team. Andre has previously maintained that he owns a trademark on Bundler and he will enforce it against Ruby Central. => https://andre.arko.net/2025/09/25/bundler-belongs-to-the-ruby-communit… So Ruby Central transfers "ownership" of Bundler to Ruby Core. Ruby Central gets to continue to maintain Bundler, and Ruby Core is stuck with the liability. If Andre wants to enforce his trademark, he now has to sue Japan-based Ruby Core and risk the bad optics of that.

Read his account of it (https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/) and you might change your mind (again).

I hadn't yet seen it when I wrote this, but 2 is pretty much exactly what Arko says: > Worried about the possibility of hacked accounts or some sort of social engineering, I took action as the primary on-call engineer to lock down the AWS account and prevent any actions by possible attackers. https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/

Update from Andre Arko: https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/ Discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45535149 Not a good look for Ruby Central IMO.

Update: https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/ is pretty much exactly the kind of thing I expected here. Person with legitimate access doing their job, organization flailing around in the process of kicking people out that should never have been kicked out in the first place.

André is working on a combination of rbenv/asdf, bundler, and gem that I think is interesting. Not that they're wildly broken, but I'd rather have fewer tools and it always seemed a bit odd that they're separate when they're notionally managing the environment in which your ruby code executes. Given the rise in supply chain attacks, I'd also like a private rubygem instance where I can whitelist gems and even versions for my company in a way that doesn't let anything else install. I'm not sure if they're taking that on or not, but I'd like it. the rv thesis is here: https://andre.arko.net/2025/08/25/rv-a-new-kind-of-ruby-management-too…

A brief announcement post: https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/05/announcing-gem-coop/

https://andre.arko.net/2025/09/28/stupid-jj-tricks/ some pretty neat jj tricks I just learned about!

It's explained in the article with a direct link to the merger agreement https://andre.arko.net/2025/09/25/bundler-belongs-to-the-ruby-communit…

See also: https://andre.arko.net/2025/09/19/goodbye-rubygems/

Alright, let's extend it. You work for Microsoft as an independent contractor, as a night watchman/groundskeeper. So do a number of others. You were hired because you and your crew of weirdos were writing the story of advanced gardening and building maintenace; which people including those at many famous and powerful companies used and found useful. A number of years ago someone said "huh, maybe these guys should get funding", and a few others agree; and Microsoft ends up in charge of distributing that funding. The above still happens. They have locked your computer with a ransomware message that says "we will give you back access if you get rid of one of you". To lock your computer, which is airgapped, it would require someone with admin privileges to your computer to walk in and manually do this. It turns out one of your has colleagues done this, added an account for the Director of Night Maintenance at Microsoft to your machine. You and almost all of the "paid employees", again, a number of whom are independent contractors, resign in protest; leaving only the person who tampered with your computer. https://bsky.app/profile/duckinator.bsky.social/post/3lz6exzgtcc2j > The behavior Ruby Central exhibited was so egregious that I sincerely thought someone's account had been compromised at one point During this chaos; which all happened between September 9 and September 18; - at midday LA time/2:40pm New York time; Microsoft terminates the contract with one specific…

> They removed other maintainers access to their AWS account, and one of them had allegedly taken a screenshot of the root password from a password manager Inaccurate: > Ruby Central also had not removed me as an “owner” of the Ruby Central GitHub Organization. They also had not rotated any of the credentials shared across the operational team using the RubyGems 1Password account. > I believe Ruby Central confused themselves into thinking the “Ruby Central” 1Password account was used by operators, and they did revoke my access there. However, that 1Password account was not used by the open source team of RubyGems.org service operators. Instead, we used the “RubyGems” 1Password account, which was full of operational credentials. Ruby Central did not remove me from the “RubyGems” 1Password account, even as of today. https://andre.arko.net/2025/10/09/the-rubygems-security-incident/ Ruby Central didn't realize that they hadn't actually revoked any access to the previous maintainers (and that they didn't have the updated root AWS credentials) until two weeks later when André notified them.