> Linux distributions supporting APT, like Ubuntu or Debian
Oh come on guys. Don't forget Fedora. Fedora means SELinux. SELinux means you are getting the people who value security.
Oh come on guys. Don't forget Fedora. Fedora means SELinux. SELinux means you are getting the people who value security.
Proper, very strict sandboxes implemented with seccomp & friends are much more secure. You simply block the large majority of system calls.
Surprisingly, they are often easier to set up.
However, Debian is shipping a number of hardened systemd unit files.
To see some examples on how the sandboxing is being set up you can grep for SystemCallFilter, CapabilityBoundingSet, ProtectSystem, ProtectHome in /lib/systemd/system/*.service
He only wants users to get Signal builds from himself, and no one else.
On the topic of LibreSignal, a fork with the only change being that it supports notifications without relying on proprietary libraries:
> I'm not OK with LibreSignal using our servers, and I'm not OK with LibreSignal using the name "Signal." You're free to use our source code for whatever you would like under the terms of the license, but you're not entitled to use our name or the service that we run.
https://github.com/LibreSignal/LibreSignal/issues/37#issueco...
Basically, he argues that no one but him has the right to build a client that connects to his servers.
Disclaimer: I personally am critical of Moxie's demands that he fully controls all released client builds, servers, and his use of analytics.
Moxie is most decidedly not against building the code yourself. He doesn't want anyone distributing forks or other clients using the official servers because a) that creates a giant hassle when updating the server and suddenly someone's fork doesn't work anymore and people will blame Signal, and b) if the client doesn't do what they want it to, people will blame Signal even though it's a third-party bug because it's got Signal in the name.
Moxie has publicly stated that he is against anyone publishing a third-party build of Signal.
He has openly and loudly ranted against F-Droid. Of course he's not against users building it for themselves, but he's publicly stated he won't allow F-Droid, or distributions, or anyone else, to build and publish the client, under the name Signal, so that it can connect to his servers.
Read the Signal-Android issues https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Android/issues/53 https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Android/issues/127 https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Android/issues/281 and https://github.com/WhisperSystems/Signal-Android/issues/6292, where moxie publicly states that he will not accept or allow any public distribution of third-party builds of Signal to connect to his servers.
He actually directly reached out to F-Droid, and demanded they take it down: https://web.archive.org/web/20160410152543/https://f-droid.o...
So, how the fuck is what I'm saying misleading?
EDIT: Oh, right, some of the linked issues were purged by him later on. Here's an archive.org link: https://web.archive.org/web/20160410153027/https://github.co...
EDIT2: The real question is why you continue to lie to defend Signal.
But with that interpretation (and the context around that, where users asked about including it in distros), my arguments are certainly relevant.
> If you read the issues you so kindly linked, he explains his reasons, and they are valid points to make even if I don't like their consequences.
His points are basically irrelevant if compared to the risks that the centralization causes.
Users of distributions have to trust their distro anyway, for many other packages (including the kernel build) already, trusting them for Signal, too, actually reduces the number of parties you have to trust.