BadgerInATrenchcoat @ThreeBadgersInATrenchcoat@social.privacytools.io

@nemo Right, I've just kind of taken what they say on that but I could be wrong. Yeah it's a complicated discussion, but I'm glad we could actually discuss it in a civil way, you'd be surprised how many people get so defensive and unnecessarily aggressive about it. I couldn't agree more, its a balancing act of security and privacy, and if privacy is your concern the Linux or BSD is just about as good as it gets.

@nemo I just finished them, they're in reply to the 1/3 message. Yeah a lot of tech people use them but I think that can be more attributed to Linux just being fun to use and mess around with due to versatility.
My point wasn't that the premium price was attributed to privacy or security. I meant its so easy to use and made for anyone to just pick up and get going, and yet its so secure, directly contradicting prior notions of convenience and security in tandem.

@nemo Feels satirical but maybe I'm just reading too much into it. Assuming that it is genuine then it's not a big deal, I actually see that on Wikipedia now. It has some roots in fedora but as they said its much more heavily based on Xen so neither place is just outright lying or totally incorrect really.

But don't think I'm just bashing Linux because I have something against it, I don't. Hell, I use Linux on all of my computers everyday and even have a secondary phone with Ubuntu Touch, I think Linux is awesome, I'm just not assuming it to be something its not and I'm certainly not using it for security.
3/3

It has verified boot, granular and strong firewalls if you know how to use them, sandboxing, etc. Once again, taking Qubes out of the equation because it's in its own league, MacOS is the gold standard for desktop OS security and it's one of the most usable and self explanatory desktop OSes. But that's the thing, the same can't be said for Linux. It seems like the worst of both worlds in a way. Steep initial learning curve, frequently difficult to use bar a few distros, atrocious security.
2/3

@nemo

Most of the internet and servers are run on Linux for stability, low overhead, versatility, and package support. I'm aware that there is no OS with perfect security or anything, and that the more secure you get the less usable it gets, and logically that would be true..except for MacOS.. MacOS right now is the leader for desktop OS security (security =/= privacy) second only to Qubes and it's extremely usable. I mean people don't pay $2500 for them to not be able to use them.
1/3

@nemo Yes, that is what I'm referring to.

@nemo Yeah I realized right after I sent it, I just typed the link incorrectly. There is another reply with the correct URL, though.

@nemo
https://www.qubes-os.org/faq/#is-qubes-just-another-linux-distribution *

@nemo
https://www.qubes-os.org/FAQ/#is-qubes-just-another-linux-distribution

@nemo Genuinely not trolling. Qubes isn't even a Linux distribution, they say it themselves.

@nemo Also I don't see how the link you attached is at all related to the discussion of hardening Linux.

Hardening Linux to a point in which it's actually secure is well out of the range of normal users and would take a team of skilled devs to have the knowledge and put in the time, no standard desktop OS devs have done this so far. Just because you harden a few SELinux policies or use a distro with a MAC framework without strict enforcement and policies or whatever else you consider hardening, it doesn't fix the inherent architectural problems with Linux and it's overarching security model.

@Feuerfuchs I mean foxarella stick, clearly

no verified boot, no full system MAC policies, and if you think "well Flatpaks have sandboxing so I'm good if I just use Flatpaks!", then you aren't. Flatpak tries to implement sandboxing but then allows and trusts all applications to set their own sandboxing policies, meaning any application security or sandboxing is entirely optional and the burden of the program developer(s) to set.
I could go on but I think you get it. I use Linux everyday, I think its great, but it is not secure.

(2/2)

@nipos It is objectively insecure. There is no sandboxing on the standard desktop, the entire kernel is written in a memory unsafe language, the kernel is too big for anyone to review so you just have to trust others, the kernel is wildly behind on exploit mitigations, a compromised non-root user with access to sudo is almost equal to a full root compromise as there are an insane amount of ways for an attacker to retrieve a password,

(1/2)

@nipos Hate to tell you but your computer probably still isn't yours. If you have an Intel or AMD processor (other than a few) your device is packed with hardware level spying that you can't remove. Also Linux is wildly insecure and its only saving grace is security by obscurity which won't protect it as it's shallow excuse forever. Also due to its lack of any meaningful sandbox, any anti privacy apps you have installed are tracking everything you're doing in other apps too.

@0
This is exactly right. The point is less that they're doing this is Kenya and more the precedent that it sets for the rest of modern cellular and technological infrastructure.

Don't root your phone though, that's not a good idea.

@thufie I mean you'd rather run the risk of going to jail, getting a hefty charge from your ISP, or needing to pay for a lawyer to defend yourself in court and spent upwards of ten to twenty thousand dollars or more? Emulation is not always viable option. Its skirting a legal line anyway but especially for consoles that are in production, are heavily DRM'd, and are owned by the copyright destroyers themselves, Sony, you're playing with fire for sure.