7 ms·
That doesn't really answer the question. How do we know all of the reviewers are uncompromised?
by Polylactic_acid 6y ago
That doesn't really answer the question. How do we know all of the reviewers are uncompromised?
- unixhero 6y agoThey have caught naughty pull requests before. I guess it's a multiple eyes thing. Certainly better than closed source Windows 10 and OSX.
- j88439h84 6y ago> Certainly better than closed source Windows 10 and OSX. How can you tell?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- elteto 6y agoBy looking at it, literally.
- Razengan 6y agoHow can you compare?
- xyproto 6y agoCan know for sure vs nobody knows. The comparison is clearly in favor of Linux.
- Razengan 6y ago> The comparison is clearly in favor of Linux. Magnitudes of more people use Windows and macOS than Linux* and they have yet to fail catastrophically. * not counting servers and embedded
- _-___________-_ 6y agoThere are far more devices running Linux in the world than Windows & macOS combined. That would seem to be a much more useful comparison than how many people own those devices. Parent post was updated to say "not counting servers and embedded", but dismissing smartphones -- literally the most popular type of personal computing device in the world -- this way seems to completely invalidate the point.
- j88439h84 6y agoI dunno, why do you say that?
- _-___________-_ 6y agoThe parent thread was about possible backdoors; more devices running a piece of software = more surface area for any possible backdoor in that software.
- speedgoose 6y agoThe windows source code is actually readable for very large organizations and governments.
- iso947 6y agoBut not the White hat hacking world.
- megous 6y agoBut can they build it and run it? Or do they have to trust the code is current and matches the binaries?
- speedgoose 6y agoI would belive so. Probably possible to compile and debug but not distribute. There is little information about it. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/ https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sharedsource/
- j88439h84 6y ago> Can know for sure can know what -- that there isn't a backdoor? I can look at Linux source all day and not find the answer to that.
- xyproto 6y agoWe, as a community, can. One dedicated person, can.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y agoI recall one famous one of quite a few years ago which looked suspiciously backdoor-ish (= instead of == IIRC), but can you provide a link to more?
- RinTohsaka 6y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24106213 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24106213
- Razengan 6y agoOne could imagine a sophisticated attack involving multiple patches to different subsystems at different times, that eventually converge into a Voltron-like monster once they’re all inside the kernel.
- Fredej 6y agoPotentially. However that also leaves a larger attack-surface, in the sense that more patches = even more scrutiny. Conceivably such a scheme would require all parts to be included (I mean, why make it larger than necessary?), so it would be extremely fragile to any single maintainer seeing the potential for abuse and correcting it.
- nurettin 6y agoThis is called a chain of trust. You assume an unhealthy amount of tinfoil when someone suggests full chain compromise and move on with your life.