5 ms·

If you're not reading all the source of everything you're running, any or all of it it absolutely could be reporting usage/stats/your data to a "mothership". J

• inimino 6y ago
  You don't need to read it, you just need to be able to read it. Just because there are risks doesn't mean the risks are meaningfully comparable.
  • muraiki 6y ago
    Ken Thompson won a Turing Award for showing how that isn’t the case: http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thompson.pdf http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~ganger/712.fall02/papers/p761-thom...
    • teddyh 6y ago
      May I direct your attention to https://reproducible-builds.org/ https://reproducible-builds.org/
    • inimino 6y ago
      That what isn't the case? Pointing out additional threat vectors doesn't in any way contradict my point.
• sarakayakomzin 6y ago
  > If you're not reading all the source of everything you're running, any or all of it it absolutely could be reporting usage/stats/your data to a "mothership". there's a big difference in threat vector between one mothership and 200. Just because there's no single central org involved doesn't make it safe.
• heavyset_go 6y ago
  We already know that, by design, macOS will report back to the mothership. If things are working 100% correctly, Apple will collect what programs you run and when you do so. Linux won't report to the mothership by design. If things work 100% correctly, you don't have to worry about some company knowing what programs you run and when.