You can’t reject his argument in full because you’re already biting back at the wrong argument. OP isn’t saying that free, open-source software is untarnished b

You can’t reject his argument in full because you’re already biting back at the wrong argument. OP isn’t saying that free, open-source software is untarnished by and incapable of crimes against consumer privacy, but the fact that it is FOSS allows concerned members of the public to inspect it so, whereas proprietary software does not. How do you reckon you are able to know of the very example that you cited, for instance?