Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)PL
Posts
0
Comments
1,169
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Since the user can select to show unverified software I'm very much in favor of this. As long as it's still very visible that a package is unverified after you changed the setting. With security being one of the main selling points of Flatpaks, there should be a clear distinction between verified and unverified packages, and the goal should be that all packages should be verified.

  • I really wouldn't, because I wouldn't want to risk them succeeding. It could be like Meta with WhatsApp, they just say "sure anyone can interoperate with us, they just have to use the Signal protocol because it's the safest and what we use". Google et al could say "any system could be considered trusted, as long as these security criteria are met" and the criteria are such that they go completely against the form of user control of the OS and software that Linux is all about. Technically a Linux distro could be made to meet the requirements, but pretty much no current day Linux user would ever want to use it because they'd be giving up the thing that made them switch to Linux in the first place - their control.