3 ms·
This is a really poor post. Lots of in-the-weeds long-running-feud grudge holding snark, but no real examination of the issues at hand. And his assertions don't
by skywhopper 8y ago
This is a really poor post. Lots of in-the-weeds long-running-feud grudge holding snark, but no real examination of the issues at hand. And his assertions don't make sense in any case. You can't trust the Google Play store because a malicious actor might have swapped out the trusted roots on you. But then why should we trust F-Droid's signing infrastructure?
Then he gripes that the posted APK has to be manually checksummed to use it. If you are truly paranoid, trusting a checksum you get from the same page you get a binary is as secure as ignoring the checksum altogether. But why would you trust a hidden signature process you can't see any more? How do you know your F-Droid binary was secure?
But worst of all is this pointless assertion: "Truly secure systems don’t require trust."
There are no truly secure systems. Malicious actors could replace your Matrix app with a lookalike clone. Your phone could have a hidden keylogger built into the OS. Or the hardware. The person's phone on the other end of your communication could have been compromised. You could be being monitored by all sorts of undetectable means.
Perfect security is an unattainable goal, but good security requires acknowledging and enabling trust to play a role in the protocols and systems we develop.
- innerspirit 8y agoThe post is literally responding line by line to a post from 5 years ago. Very poorly thought out article.