001100 010010 to [email protected]English • edit-21 year agoIt's Open Source!lemmy.dbzer0.comimagemessage-square215fedilinkarrow-up11.82Karrow-down1139file-text
arrow-up11.68Karrow-down1imageIt's Open Source!lemmy.dbzer0.com001100 010010 to [email protected]English • edit-21 year agomessage-square215fedilinkfile-text
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•1 year agoYeah, but that just happens sometimes. With proprietary software you don’t even have the benefit of being able to audit it to see if the programmers missed something critical, you kinda just have to trust that they’re smarter than a would-be hacker.
minus-square@MaxVerstappenlinkEnglish1•1 year agoI get that, I just caution that FOSS doesn’t automatically mean secure.
minus-squareCyclohexaneMlinkfedilinkEnglish2•1 year agoNothing is 100% secure. FOSS is definitely more secure, all else equal.
Yeah, but that just happens sometimes. With proprietary software you don’t even have the benefit of being able to audit it to see if the programmers missed something critical, you kinda just have to trust that they’re smarter than a would-be hacker.
I get that, I just caution that FOSS doesn’t automatically mean secure.
Nothing is 100% secure. FOSS is definitely more secure, all else equal.