This is a polemic written by the author of a competing tool.
You can tell xz isn’t so bad by the complete absence of any real world report of xz causing issues.
You can tell xz isn’t so bad by the complete absence of any real world report of xz causing issues.
Describing it as a "polemic" seems like an overly emotional reaction. Did you actually read it? It seems a well-researched, well-informed article to me, with solid verifiable facts.