On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 10:43:19PM +0000, Peter von Kaehne wrote: > > > > > Even if you have it can be very hard to find carefully constructed back > > doors. > > Shrug.. as opposed to installing closed source programmes where you know you > are spied upon ? Which may of course have back doors but thanks tk being > closed you I’ll not even learn about?
OK - I agree with you. FLOSS is much better from that point of view; my point was that FLOSS is not a guarantee. The OP was talking about spooks, these guys are well funded and capable of producing hard to detect back doors. FLOSS is also more resistant to a government bribing or strong arming a closed source company to include a spook produced back door. "much better" != "perfect" - ie vigilance is still needed. > > Some code has been carefully looked at but most has not. > > > >>> On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 4:03 PM mick.crane <mick.cr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> I love open source, more than you might think, but I have a niggling > >>> feeling it's been infiltrated to make user control difficult. > >>> If I was a spook it's what I'd do. > >>> Please prove me wrong. > >>> mick -- Alain Williams Linux/GNU Consultant - Mail systems, Web sites, Networking, Programmer, IT Lecturer. +44 (0) 787 668 0256 https://www.phcomp.co.uk/ Parliament Hill Computers Ltd. Registration Information: https://www.phcomp.co.uk/Contact.html #include <std_disclaimer.h>
