2 ms·
"I don't see how randomly installing a Flatpak is any worse for security than compiling the source myself." It's worse because you're likely to install more pa
by akkartik 5y ago
"I don't see how randomly installing a Flatpak is any worse for security than compiling the source myself."
It's worse because you're likely to install more packages using something like Flatpak than you would by downloading random binaries or building from source. That wantonness isn't justified given the current state of security on Linux.
(I'm just regurgitating OP: "Flatpak and Snap apologists claim that some security is better than nothing. This is not true. From a purely technical perspective, for apps with filesystem access the security is exactly equal to nothing. In reality it’s actually worse than nothing because it leads people to place more trust than they should in random apps they find on the internet.")
- jcelerier 5y ago> It's worse because you're likely to install more packages using something like Flatpak than you would by downloading random binaries or building from source. ... what makes you say that ? if I want to run something, it'll run one way or another no matter how hard the "system" wants to prevent that. Even if it's patch.exe downloaded from a 2004 russian website.