linuxmemes

21172 readers

942 users here now

Hint: :q!

Sister communities:

LemmyMemes: Memes
LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts

Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html

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

[email protected]

239

I respect people who don't like snaps, but Canonical will not abandon a successful project (slrpnk.net)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

93 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 21 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Former Unix security chief.

Do not use snaps. Risky as hell.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Why? I've heard this for years at this point, but as someone who rarely uses snaps because they're the only convenient option for software I'm using, I'm generally ambivalent about them.

People seem to hold really strong opinions about snap but I've never been able to get a straight answer, just a bunch of hand waving.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Mainly the snap client doesnt let you configure a secondary source, and ubuntu's repo doesn't have a good track record of not providing malware.

https://baronhk.wordpress.com/2023/10/01/malware-in-the-ubuntu-snap-store-again/

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/ubuntu-command-not-found-tool-can-be-abused-to-spread-malware/

https://www.linuxuprising.com/2018/05/malware-found-in-ubuntu-snap-store.html

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

So that's admittedly not a good look for canonical, but my read of that is that if you're getting widely-known software from a developer who's publishing it to snap themselves, and you're cautious about your usage, snap is fine.

For example, essentially my only use of snap is to install certbot. If I follow the directions from certbot.eff.org precisely, then I'll get certbot installed and no issues.

I certainly agree that (a) the system is ripe for abuse and (b) should be self-hostable to support Free software. Both of these could be fixed by canonical opening it up.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

My biggest hit was when they pushed browsers to snaps, and I couldn't do some of my school projects because my school stuff was on a separate disk that the snap was not allowed to access. (Had to use o365, and wasn't installing windows to write my papers)

In short, it messed up my workflow.