4 ms·
> But for privacy or opsec that's probably even worse than a saas option. Probably not, the attack vector of an apk of dubious provenance is probably that it s
by habitue 5y ago
> But for privacy or opsec that's probably even worse than a saas option.
Probably not, the attack vector of an apk of dubious provenance is probably that it sends all of your transcriptions to some 3rd party server. There's some non-zero probability that it does that, and it's possible you could run it in a network-less sandbox somehow to mitigate it.
But with the saas service, you know for a fact it's going to a 3rd party server, who can store it for as long as they want. And if they aren't hacked now, they could be in the future.
- kadoban 5y agoThat analysis would be a lot more compelling if it didn't assume that all 3rd parties are the same. A 3rd party sending around a sketch apk that calls back to them is _definitely_ going to try to do something bad with it. Otter is unlikely to do something bad with it (it'd be bad for their business). So you should really compare the odds otter gets hacked vs the odds the apk is compromised.
- notjulianjaynes 5y agoActually, I still have the bootleg apk installed, because sometimes you've just gotta live a little, right? Also happen to have the Otter app. Just checked netguard and guess which one has connected to the internet 6 times since I last opened it.