131–140 of 364 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does an installer need admin rights though
How could it not? It is adding software to the system software set, accessible by all users of the system. And many programs require some kind of integration into the OS, such as file type associations or context menu entries, which even a single user shouldn't have access to do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at it this way, why should a project like IM pay MicroSoft for the privilege of enriching and adding value to the Windows platform?
The fee for code signing certificates doesn't go to Microsoft.
Seems like security is slowly eating the software world. At some point security will be so onerous that it will take more effort than the actual software being secured. Software was more fun in the good old days before there was a huge criminal industry exploiting it. Alas, it was bound to happen eventually. That said, seems like you could bring down that price by hosting the key yourself with a yubikey or cloud hsm…
The issue here is the high financial burden to have a secure/signed release, not the security itself.
I'd assume creating a fake persona / faking whatever is required to satisfy the identity checks that come with that $630 is the actual deterrent. If it was cheap to perform the actual identity checks it would still provide this effect.
Why do we let any random application open its own files and folders at will? The actual selection and opening of files and other resources should be the job of the operating system. GUI programs should be able to call "open" "save" and other dialogs to get handles to files, not just their names. The OS should limit access to resources to those it provides (as capability tokens) and nothing else. For CLI programs, the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Let that stick in your brain for next time you wonder why Windows still hasn't gotten a competent package manager that can wrangle dependencies. winget?
Winget just runs installers and uninstallers. I don't think it wrangles dependencies. That is, it won't install a dependency as its own package, nor will it uninstall a dependency when the last dependent is uninstalled.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This way of working should have been left behind in the previous century. Sandboxing should be default. Associating file endings should be a suggestion to the OS, accepted by the user, not something only configurable by delegating full super admin to third party app. Slow loading context menus where every app tries to claim its presence. Thank you for reminding me why I don’t use Windows since years ago. A image edit…
> Sandboxing should be default. Please no. There are valid reasons to NOT sandbox, and in Windows there is sandboxing in default (windows store apps) and there are often issues with those versions of the software. For example, Slack downloaded from the windows store uses 30-40% of your CPU while idle, but not when installed from their website. Even in Linux and using the Snap sandbox (ubuntu), there are significant i…
Any opinions on this tool? I've literally never heard of it before. Seems like it's good for simple bulk editing.
Yet another reason to go with web apps/electron. The electron binary is already signed. And Web apps are good with a Letsencrypt cert.
It’s astonishing that a project as critical and widely used as ImageMagick can’t even scrape together $629 for something as essential as a software signature. It’s a glaring example of how the tech industry fails to financially support the very open-source projects that it relies so heavily upon. Despite offering incredible value, these projects often can’t capture enough of it to sustain themselves. It’s a sobering…
It’s astonishing that a project as critical and widely used as ImageMagick can’t even scrape together $629 for something as essential as a software signature. It’s a glaring example of how the tech industry fails to financially support the very open-source projects that it relies so heavily upon. Despite offering incredible value, these projects often can’t capture enough of it to sustain themselves. It’s a sobering…
I don't think the $629 itself is the problem, but rather that they're being forced to spend it on something that many people don't agree is "essential" in any way. Is it about security, or is it about crying "security" to push through a pay-to-play market?