41–50 of 223 posts
Canonical's Snapcraft literally says "Get published in minutes"
Any random guy would publish his malware with near no review
https://dashboard.snapcraft.io/snaps/
Yes, they maybe win the counter for published apps compared to flathub. Congratulations!
I'm not familiar with Ubuntu snap store, but how does it compare with Google play store in terms of security? For example, do apps need to request permissions for accomplishing specific tasks, or is there any kind of sandboxing involved?
I do not know if there are any auto checks when the package is added automatically.
The problem with snaps is that they didn't take security really seriously on desktop: https://www.zdnet.com/article/linux-expert-matthew-garrett-u... >"X has no real concept of different levels of application trust. Any application can register to receive keystrokes from any other application. Any application can inject fake key events into the input stream. An application that is otherwise confined by strong securit…
used a proprietary license Does the license actually mention it mines? I am reminded of a lot of "freemium"/"ad-supported"/etc. software that makes its author money via ads or whatever else --- and you agree to that if you read the license --- and it is a bit shady to name the miner 'systemd', but it seems rather overboard to call this "malware"... when I see that term I think of software that self-propagates and exf…
There is no support for specifying the license yet, so all snap packages appear as "proprietary". Nothing to look here. edit: https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/snap-license-metadata/856/53 Still it is unresolved, they probably use the deprecated licence feature in VLC.
>For example, the 2048buntu snap was submitted as proprietary, so we can't actually see the package contents, except for the init script which you can see above. Unless the Snap Store uses some kind of DRM, I don't see how that can be the case. Just install it and see the contents in your filesystem?
used a proprietary license Does the license actually mention it mines? I am reminded of a lot of "freemium"/"ad-supported"/etc. software that makes its author money via ads or whatever else --- and you agree to that if you read the license --- and it is a bit shady to name the miner 'systemd', but it seems rather overboard to call this "malware"... when I see that term I think of software that self-propagates and exf…
>a simple game like that taking >100MB would make me suspicious Nah. Games often feature a bunch of textures and video and sound files. Bad compression or too high resolution on those is quite common, which is why games _are_ often that large. Also proprietary software usually ships a bunch of libraries - games often ship with a premade engine, which are also often quite large. As a datapoint, I have a copy of "Strat…
used a proprietary license Does the license actually mention it mines? I am reminded of a lot of "freemium"/"ad-supported"/etc. software that makes its author money via ads or whatever else --- and you agree to that if you read the license --- and it is a bit shady to name the miner 'systemd', but it seems rather overboard to call this "malware"... when I see that term I think of software that self-propagates and exf…
>a simple game like that taking >100MB would make me suspicious Nah. Games often feature a bunch of textures and video and sound files. Bad compression or too high resolution on those is quite common, which is why games _are_ often that large. Also proprietary software usually ships a bunch of libraries - games often ship with a premade engine, which are also often quite large. As a datapoint, I have a copy of "Strat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no support for specifying the license yet, so all snap packages appear as "proprietary". Nothing to look here. edit: https://forum.snapcraft.io/t/snap-license-metadata/856/53 Still it is unresolved, they probably use the deprecated licence feature in VLC.
That is not true. You absolutely can specify a license: https://snapcraft.io/vlc
used a proprietary license Does the license actually mention it mines? I am reminded of a lot of "freemium"/"ad-supported"/etc. software that makes its author money via ads or whatever else --- and you agree to that if you read the license --- and it is a bit shady to name the miner 'systemd', but it seems rather overboard to call this "malware"... when I see that term I think of software that self-propagates and exf…
I use one donationware app and it's cleanly marked it display an add and it's explained they fetch it from their own site via a dumb static image request on startup (it sits under the main GUI, it's not a splash or wait or anything) and for a donation you can get rid of it. That's leagues above the experience an average website gives you without adblocking software these days.
As for the size - I've no idea what happened, the original page[0] tested by [1] reports as 153 KB. Maybe he just wrapped it in electron?
[0] - http://gabrielecirulli.github.io/2048/ [1] - https://tools.pingdom.com/