this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
302 points (98.4% liked)

linuxmemes

21254 readers
1523 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.

  • Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] echo64@lemmy.world 38 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

    I know we all like to hate on canonical for literally any reason, but this happens with every single software repository that is not a closed garden and some that are.

    And yeah, it's sandboxed, so the damage is far, far less than it could be.

    [–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 60 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    Given that the snap store is a closed source proprietary component, I'd argue that snaps are a walled garden

    [–] caseyweederman@lemmy.ca 22 points 7 months ago

    That was supposed to be their one thing.

    [–] trevor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 54 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    Sandboxing does nothing for social-engineering attacks, which is what many of the malicious snaps were designed for.

    And the thing that makes the Snap Store uniquely bad is that there's no human review. Anyone can throw up a malicious snap, and there are very good odds that it'll get served there. Even the Flathub, a community-run project, has human reviews before new apps get published. Canonical, despite having money and resources that community projects don't, can't seem to be bothered to take basic steps to protect their users.

    [–] kautau@lemmy.world 23 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    Yeah, what’s important to note is snap just requires a web based submission process.

    https://snapcraft.io/docs/using-the-snap-store

    Flathub requires a PR in GitHub, visible to the community. Spammers know they will get caught opening PRs

    https://docs.flathub.org/docs/for-app-authors/submission/

    [–] zephr_c@lemm.ee 25 points 7 months ago

    Canonical is a profitable corporation trying to convince people to use their actual closed garden software repository but they can't even be bothered to do even the most basic of sanity checks to prevent obvious scams from appearing on their store. Stop making excuses for them.

    [–] sirico@feddit.uk 15 points 7 months ago

    I think the main issue here is they are telling users the software is safe without any due diligence.

    [–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 4 points 7 months ago

    Closed garden has the same problem too, it's not immune