I wonder if those supposedly secure Linux distros are actually secure.
Anything from MS, Google, and Apple cannot be trusted.
Anything from MS, Google, and Apple cannot be trusted.
Open source has one really good benefit, Having more eyes on the code, which means less likely a bug goes undetected. It also means reduced effort for finding bugs. Though imo Linux is arguably more safer because if it's smaller surface area.
I think Linux (with additions like AppArmor/SELinux) is definitely more than enough for most high profile people. That coupled with Good Security practices (not running untrusted binaries, using end-to-end encrypted mediums for communication) imo should deter 99.9% of those surveillance attacks.
This a million times.
The concept is so simple it doesn't even need proof or examples as solid arguments, but just in case, here's one: the famous Interbase backdoor.
Interbase was a database engine by Borland. In 1994 some developer added a hardcoded credential backdoor to ease development, but forgot to remove it in production. The backdoor wasn't malicious, yet still dangerous as it gave administrator privileges to anyone; it went unnoticed for about seven years and multiple versions of the product. In mid 2000, Borland released Interbase as Open Source, and within six months the vulnerability was discovered and fixed.
https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2001/03/back_door_s...