Conversation
Notices
-
#DDG blog has published a list of replacements for #Google services, some free code
https://spreadprivacy.com/how-to-remove-google/
-
The only major fail is recommending #iThings over #Android. Out of the frying pan, into the blast furnace. What about #Replicant folks?
-
@nikola evidence please for the claim that #iOS is more "secure & privacy-aware" than #Android?
-
@nikola I suspect the one with at least a free code core would be better than a totally proprietary OS designed to enslave its users
-
@nikola also, how does a secure and privacy-respecting OS become "mainstream"? By being recommended, used, and the developers supported
-
@nikola publicly auditable source code may not be sufficient for security, but it's an essential prerequisite. Usability is a separate issue
-
@nikola also, don't confuse privacy with security. Even if iThings are private to anyone but Apple, that's still far from private
-
@nikola note that I'm not defending #Android device here. Any OS the user doesn't have root on is neither secure nor private, by definition
-
@nikola no, you can't, because you can never be sure proprietary source code presented for audit is the same as that used in production.
-
@nikola with free code you can compile from source and compare the resulting binaries to the production system
-
@nikola compile from the source in the public-facing repository that is
-
@nikola I didn't claim that every piece of free code is secure. I said public availability of source is *necessary*, but not sufficient.
-
@nikola you can claim proprietary software is "successfully audited" all you like, but you are factually wrong, for reasons I just gave
-
@nikola who are these security auditors of proprietary software? Who pays them? How can they be held accountable if they report falsely?
-
@nikola security audits may be useful to a proprietary software owner, but they offer no useful guarantee to a proprietary software user
-
@nikola finally, not formally audited != not secure. Publicly available code is being Informally audited all the time by hackers who use it
-
@nikola here's a better handheld for #DDG to recommend than iThings
https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/
-
@nikola that's if privacy and security is the criteria, obviously the price of a #Librem 5 is at the higher end for a handheld
-
@nikola more productive that recommending a phone known to censor and spy on its users
https://stallman.org/apple.html
-
@nikola the real problem with delivering a libre phone lies in coordinating demand with supply
-
@nikola see: https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2016/07/06/silent-circle-blackphone-losses-layoffs-geekphone-lawsuit/#6159c84c3b30
-
@nikola I think the solution could be consumer-owner #coops, who can be ready to bulk buy good libre hardware when it becomes available
-
@therealpennyfortheguy @nikola would the same apply to someone with a 100% free code phone like a #Replicant or a #Purism #Librem 5?
-
@nikola @strypey
non-free software has security properties which are not independently verifiable, so there is a non-trivial probability that any security claims made about such software will be false. No matter how much the user twiddles with settings if the closed codebase is evil then they're merely engaging in security theatrics or "feelgood computing".
-
@therealpennyfortheguy @nikola ok, but humour me. If I came to your house with a #Replicant phone, would you make me leave it in the car?
-
@therealpennyfortheguy @nikola I guess what I'm asking is, is it the proprietary spyware on the devices your distrust, or the cell network
-
@therealpennyfortheguy @nikola what about laptops?
-
@therealpennyfortheguy have you seen 'Better Call Saul'? Making people leave their phone outside reminds me of Chuck ;) Fair enough though