That’s alright. Full stop. Since you’re creating the package you should have most freedom to coin things.
I am not contributing much but seems like I am providing a Free platform with services:
- review packages
- build packages
- installable from third party APT repository (similar to a PPA but more restricted, much less scalable)
- sometimes install by default in Whonix, Kicksecure, which are distributions which potentially might become available as host operating systems, are already available for various virtualizers.
Other possible package names:
Since there is
security-misc already, perhaps a companion package
security-extra (opt-in package) which comes with all the more experimental, (potential) breaking security enhancements? Or
security-paranoid (depending on
paranoid being viewed as compliment or insult) (after all the revelations on the state of computer security, nothing really is “paranoid”). Just brain storming.
Makes sense. Since this is becoming an opt-in package, there is nearly unlimited freedom of usability issues and inconveniences.
Could be different boot modes? Relates to multiple boot modes for better security: persistent + root | persistent + noroot | live + root | live + noroot.
Would be OK. However, coming at a disadvantage. That would effectively make apt a tool which can be used (by root) to modify any file on the system. It would be possible to add local or remote APT repositories to /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ folder or to define the (local!) repository URI as APT command line parameter. By using a local APT repository it might even be possible to write a wrapper script that would abuse that mechanism to write to any file on the system.