3 ms·
You are comparing apples to oranges. The OS being inherently untrustworthy forces you to operate under the assumption that it is tracking you and that it does
by huhtenberg 13y ago
You are comparing apples to oranges.
The OS being inherently untrustworthy forces you to operate under the assumption that it is tracking you and that it does have backdoors. So instead of focusing on weeding out any rootkits or backdoors, you'd be putting the OS under external scrutiny, including filtering all of its network traffic on a separate device.
If, on the other hand, you let yourself get convinced that a stock Debian installation is more likely than not to be "clean", then you just lost your edge and any interested party can waltz in with a truckload of rootkits and you wouldn't even think to care. This whole "open source is more trustworthy" mindset is really quite dangerous.
- TheLegace 13y agoI don't understand how it's apples an oranges. So your telling me right now the choice between Windows, OSX and Linux and the choice for security is somehow ambiguous? Both Microsoft and Apple have been directly passing data to the NSA. Where are the data leaks from Linux or other open source software. Open source software is a lot harder to control, not only do you have people with principles in play, your gonna have a tough time gaining control over decentralized systems. Just remember if someone(like the NSA or any other skilled hacker) wants to get on to your computer they will, with enough time anything can be broken. So whats the solution let's pick Windows and never look back.