4 ms·
A) The hash/filename comments, that's ridiculous and obviously meant to mislead (yes, the BOTG person tries to walk it back, but it was still bullshit) 2) The l
by 9935c101ab17a66 8y ago
A) The hash/filename comments, that's ridiculous and obviously meant to mislead (yes, the BOTG person tries to walk it back, but it was still bullshit)
2) The lack of actual rebuttal — a tonne of valid points were made about the bundled binary, the dats, the phoning home, the unsigned executables, etc. None of them were addressed.
3) the nonsense about digital signatures
Do you really truly think they did an adequate job responding to the complaints/criticisms/questions? Seriously?
- ksk 8y agoOK I just re-read the thread. What did they walk back? Someone posted hashes of different files and asked why they don't match. >The lack of actual rebuttal — a tonne of valid points were made about the bundled binary, the dats, the phoning home, the unsigned executables, etc. None of them were addressed. https://forum.filezilla-project.org/viewtopic.php?p=161493#p161493 https://forum.filezilla-project.org/viewtopic.php?p=161493#p... Maybe the dude didn't go into excruciating detail but I understood the reply. Which part of the reply was factually incorrect? >3) the nonsense about digital signatures Could you link to the comment ? >Do you really truly think they did an adequate job responding to the complaints/criticisms/questions? Seriously? I don't know which complaints you're referring to. Some are reasonable, and others are just wild accusations. But just to give you an answer that you will be happy with, No, they didn't.