Linux creator explains why a truly secure computing platform will never exist
bgr.com
bgr.com
I don't know if a "truly secure computing platform" can exist, but one cannot derive assumptions from the current landscape.
Check out this:
> Sandstorm is a security product.
> We like to say that Sandstorm's priorities are Usability, Security, and Freedom. In public, we tend to talk more about usability and freedom, because those are the priorities users are most excited about. However, within the team, we are just as passionate -- if not more so -- about security.
> Ultimately, our goal is that, to the maximum extent possible, users need not worry about security, because using the system intuitively will result in the desired security properties "by default". Moreover, we aim to allow network administrators to be able to say: "As long as it's on Sandstorm, you can run whatever apps you want, because we trust Sandstorm to keep things secure."
https://docs.sandstorm.io/en/latest/using/security-practices...
Given what most current OSes are engaged in: surveillance, tracking, data-warehousing, data-sharing with untold/unnamed "trusted" partners, civil rights violations, illegal search/seizure, 5th amendment rights violations, etal... his answer skirts the issue entirely.
I guess... what he was saying is that he's like Linux (The Kernel). To paraphrase him: He's an enabler. Perhaps an imp. Something totally hidden and out of people's mind when it comes to how OSes have been weaponized against people. He has no position on the matter.
Ugh. This is why people use ad blockers.
Security/usability tradeoffs do exist, but it's not zero-sum. Linus seems to think it is, which is why Linux will never come close to being a truly secure computing platform.
He does not bring up the topic, others do. But when they do, he gives an honest response.