3 ms·

Linux survived these attacks. Debian survived them. Ubuntu did. More or less all Linux distributions have been attacked but survived, many of them thrive. Yes,

Linux survived these attacks. Debian survived them. Ubuntu did. More or less all Linux distributions have been attacked but survived, many of them thrive. Yes, this is free software. Being less susceptible to these problems has been one of the stated advantages of using such for a long time. Alternative 'stores' carrying 'pirated' non-free software do not have this advantage and can easily turn into dark places so the solution does not lie there. Will people choose a 'boring' free software 'store' over a 'cool pirate store' (Arrrrr!)? Some will, some won't. Those who will will end up being mostly silent as the thing just works. Those who won't will be susceptible to the whims of those who put up those 'stores' and are likely to come home with a bit more than they asked for. Some 'stores' will get a good reputation along the lines of that of F-Droid, some will get the reputation of being the place to go to get the latest craze but also the latest infection. Users will start making conscious decisions based on those reputations, just like they already do elsewhere. Will opening up closed platforms like iOS for third-party software repositories get rid of these problems? No, it won't, it will even raise the average level of problematic software on that platform. The difference between closed systems and more open ones is not that the closed ones are inferior, it is that they limit the user's choice to get something which is better as well as worse than what the walled garden offers. In this context better can mean software which does not come with tracking, analytics, profiling and other such privacy-invading nonsense. I can get the source code and build it myself, I can host my own repository, only time limits where I can go. This is not true for the Google Play Store or the Apple Appstore, nor is it true for the Amazon equivalent or any of those Chinese alternatives. That is why I chose to use something like F-Droid. By the way, there is nothing keeping e.g. Facebook or Twitter from releasing a free software version of their apps. Their value - and most of their profiling proficiency - lies in their platforms, not in the apps used to access them. They might lose any additional venues for leaching the user of data but they would gain some believability when they state that they're not up to no good. Of course there are plenty of alternative apps for these services so they don't really need to but they could if they wanted to.

acdha 8y ago
> Linux survived these attacks. Debian survived them. Ubuntu did. More or less all Linux distributions have been attacked but survived, many of them thrive. Really? Is there a huge market of mainstream consumer Linux software which I've missed in the past 3 decades of using it? The answer is, of course, no. Linux distributions have mostly been used by developers and other IT people and there's never been the equivalent of the mainstream mobile app ecosystem used by people who are asked to make critical security decisions which they don't know how to answer. If there was an equivalent, there would be the same sleazy sites pushing free porn, games, taking successful apps and repackaging them, etc. that we see in the mobile/Windows desktop world, and normal people would routinely be socially-engineered to get access to free stuff, just as Linux users have for years been fooled into running binaries or installing packages. This isn't more widespread because there's not much money in it but if that were to change it would immediately require the same kind of hardening which every other consumer OS has had to make.
- Yetanfou 8y ago
  Well, there is Android, that uses Linux and is as mainstream consumer as it gets. Do mind that I specifically said 'Linux survived' as in 'the Linux kernel project', followed by a number of Linux distributions. Also, where are those Linux users [who] have for years been fooled into running binaries or installing packages? The majority of Linux users get their software from repositories maintained by whichever distribution they use. This fact is one of the reasons why Linux users are far less likely to install 'random' software. It is that aspect of Linux distributions which 'stores' like F-Droid bring to Android. Last, what kind of 'hardening' do you deem every other consumer OS has had to make which Linux distributions have yet to accomplish? I'd go so far as saying that the likes of Windows and MacOS are playing catch-up here in finally getting around to implementing a sane repository infrastructure from which users can install and update software instead of having them hunting around the web for some SETUP.EXE to download and click on - which then proceeds to install not only the requested program but also a host of toolbars and 'shopping assistants'. That both Apple as well as Microsoft took one step further in making these software repositories single-source to the detriment of their user's freedom of choice is what started this discussion in the first place.

acdha 8y ago

> Linux survived these attacks. Debian survived them. Ubuntu did. More or less all Linux distributions have been attacked but survived, many of them thrive. Really? Is there a huge market of mainstream consumer Linux software which I've missed in the past 3 decades of using it? The answer is, of course, no. Linux distributions have mostly been used by developers and other IT people and there's never been the equivalent of the mainstream mobile app ecosystem used by people who are asked to make critical security decisions which they don't know how to answer. If there was an equivalent, there would be the same sleazy sites pushing free porn, games, taking successful apps and repackaging them, etc. that we see in the mobile/Windows desktop world, and normal people would routinely be socially-engineered to get access to free stuff, just as Linux users have for years been fooled into running binaries or installing packages. This isn't more widespread because there's not much money in it but if that were to change it would immediately require the same kind of hardening which every other consumer OS has had to make.

Yetanfou 8y ago
Well, there is Android, that uses Linux and is as mainstream consumer as it gets. Do mind that I specifically said 'Linux survived' as in 'the Linux kernel project', followed by a number of Linux distributions. Also, where are those Linux users [who] have for years been fooled into running binaries or installing packages? The majority of Linux users get their software from repositories maintained by whichever distribution they use. This fact is one of the reasons why Linux users are far less likely to install 'random' software. It is that aspect of Linux distributions which 'stores' like F-Droid bring to Android. Last, what kind of 'hardening' do you deem every other consumer OS has had to make which Linux distributions have yet to accomplish? I'd go so far as saying that the likes of Windows and MacOS are playing catch-up here in finally getting around to implementing a sane repository infrastructure from which users can install and update software instead of having them hunting around the web for some SETUP.EXE to download and click on - which then proceeds to install not only the requested program but also a host of toolbars and 'shopping assistants'. That both Apple as well as Microsoft took one step further in making these software repositories single-source to the detriment of their user's freedom of choice is what started this discussion in the first place.