2 ms·
> I don't see the incentive for the vendor to do something shady with it. Now. It is not a matter of having incentives. It is a matter that they can abuse and
by marcodiego 5y ago
> I don't see the incentive for the vendor to do something shady with it.
Now.
It is not a matter of having incentives. It is a matter that they can abuse and you simply have no way to check or control it.
- loldk 5y agoIncentives are literally just reasons for doing things. So naturally I don't follow your logic at all.
- breakfastduck 5y agoYou have no way to check if this app is sending network requests back 'home'? That doesn't seem correct at all.
- marcodiego 5y agoFor such an intrusive application there are many ways to hide it. Not saying they do it, but I see no way to check it unless looking at the source code.
- MauranKilom 5y agoWell, two possibilities that come to my mind: - Run it in a Windows VM. The program could detect this and not phone home in this case, of course. - Monitoring on network level (wireshark on same network, Pi-hole, router itself...). This is virtually impossible for the program to circumvent. You could also audit the changes it made to the system (resorting to stuff like diffing disk images before/after if you really want zero trust) to verify that nothing sneaky was left after running the program once.
- stinos 5y agoIs it possible to circumvent Wireshark, Procmon and the likes? Otherwise those 2 combined give pretty good insight in what an application is doing wrt I/O.
- jabits 5y agoLooking at the source code is pretty useless unless you compile it yourself...