In the bfu columns it says bfu: yes bf: no. And in the other columns it says ffs: yes bf: no. So they can’t access the full file system from bfu, they can only access… bfu? What does that mean? They can clone the encrypted storage? ‘Unlock’ the system partition?
They’re either targeting businesses (so obscene prices) or clamav, which is buggy
No? There needs to be a space between on piefed and that’s how it works on github too.
… but people in that group are a bit of a lost cause.
touche. I don’t think the existence of other threats is a reason to dismiss this one. And I don’t think simply prohibiting running random executables is sufficient as it isn’t ‘most users’ who are switching to Linux. The people likely to switch to Linux are also the people likely to want to run programs that aren’t yet distributed in repos. I can imagine a scenario where the malware is hidden in a program hosted on a custom flatpak repo and requires permissions for normal operation that’d make flatseal ineffective for stopping the malware.
The ideal anti-virus in my mind would ignore programs installed from official repos and on access scan ones installed from anywhere else. It’d also keep track of critical vulnerabilities to give you a heads up about updating your system.
Your viewer must be parsing #8 as # 8.
You’re free to not ‘waste time’ with anti-virus but I prefer the peace of mind.
On one hand I still believe what I said above and what you just said to be true… You can’t mess up Arch in a way you can’t recover. On the other hand I wish I didn’t dread updating my system because every time I update some random program manages to break.
#8 reawakened my nervousness about the lack of virus protection on Linux. With every milestone we celebrate it becomes more likely that malicious people target desktop Linux with their malware, and I don’t think the “Linux is inherently secure” mentality helps. I hope clamav’s on access scanner is fixed and improved so it becomes commonplace before there’s some big newsworthy scandal.
Are they friends? If they are friends sure, they’re evil. Although if that were the case I think the person calling them evil (and the linked blog) would have included that front and center rather than the definition of open source stuff.
I’ve clicked through the links and the most ‘evil’ thing they did seems to be using a non-mainstream open source licence? Evil is getting contracted by Israel. Prohibiting other companies from profiting off your work isn’t evil.
Edit: And they hosted an interview with Curtis Yarvin. That’s worse, but still doesn’t warrant calling them evil.
? Demolishing 2 detached towers is definitely easier than 50 built directly on buildings.
I don’t know? But it’s definitely easier than what the picture in the post suggests
Image isn’t real
Risk instruction is not very accurate since even arm has them but microops still exist
Can you not create another release by the same name?
I’m convinced Arch with archinstall is the easiest Linux to use for users competent with computers. It just requires that the user isn’t afraid of command line interfaces.
I’ve tried the Mint, Ubuntu and uBlue. Had something go wrong with each. Mint didn’t install graphics drivers, Ubuntu had nonsensical design with snap and uBlue corrupted the boot order after a month.
With distros designed to just work it isn’t easy to fix issues when they come up. With Arch there’s no expectation that things work by default, so when something goes wrong you can just make it work again.
Rob Liefeld draws some weird anatomy sometimes but that page is grasping hard.
Or something about packaging. Or I used a function that has a different implementation for debug mode out of its intended purpose. Or
Only thing worse is not finding the bug that only happens in release mode
In addition to ‘just write anything and stick with it’, getting someone who knows what they’re doing to look at your code and criticize it can be useful.
I wasn’t asking about the acronyms…
In the afu columns they specify that their tool can get full file system access. But in the bfu columns they only specify if they can or cannot access bfu. They can’t access the full contents of the phone as in that case those would also read ffs: yes. So that means there’s a hack they can do on bfu that doesn’t allow access to the file system but is still useful enough to advertise.