this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
576 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
59119 readers
2230 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That they leak information? I work in commercial software development and I have to do a lot of open source security reviews. The answer is: virtually none.
Private, closed-source software on the other hand... If it could sniff your farts and send the smell to advertisers, it would; in almost all cases.
No, that people actually take the time to check the source code before installing them
I've seen enough crypto scams to know that even when the code is public, people don't bother... Heck, there are scanning tools for crypto that tell you how risky the shitcoins are and people still get scammed out of thousands of dollars!
Not everyone have to check something. But there are people that do routinely check popular stuff, either on their own or for their job. Sometimes this raises issues, which are usually handled appropriately. Of course if you download a little unknown piece of software made by a single person and never advertised anywhere, you'll have to do the job yourself. But anything semi-popular attracts enough attention to get some level of audit, at least because business uses a lot of open source. There are even businesses whose main product is auditing and developing open source, kind of like bounty hunters.
And of course there are counter-examples, too. TrueCrypt got pulled out quite dramatically, and I'm not sure we know why even now. But the more sensitive the stuff, the higher the chance of it getting some level of investigation.
As a software user, you can either care about your privacy or not. Caring about your privacy and not either vetting what you're planning to use or checking that someone else has before using it, is akin to sticking your hand in a fire to find out if it's hot.
Taking that analogy further, malicious open source software is kind of like a burning building. It only takes one person to raise the flag for it to spread pretty quickly through social media or other means that it is malicious. The whole community doesn't need to acknowledge the fire for something to be done about it.