It’s in reference to recent issues the Canonical Snap Store has had with letting malware get past the review process. Since Snaps are pretty tightly integrated in Ubuntu, people with concerns about the Snap store wouldn’t want to take the risk with a distro that makes it hard to opt out of an app store with a proprietary backend that seems to have issues with letting malicious apps onto the platform. This matters more to some people than others, but I think it’s fair to question Ubuntu’s safety given the track record.
This is not a fair argument, considering how much software is provided for Ubuntu compared to any other Linux distribution. Similar things happen to Play Store and Apple App Store. Should we start calling them malware app stores?
A 2013 stint about Universal Search having internet search integrated, or the Amazon store shortcut, are not things relevant in 2024. Mint likewise had compromised ISOs publicly hosted on their website upon a compromise around 2016/17. That means Mint is more insecure and malware-y, I guess?
I don’t disagree, the person you were replying to could’ve used better language that didn’t characterize Ubuntu as malware-infested and been more specific about what they were referring to. In any event, a couple scammy malware apps that were installed at the user’s discretion are not enough evidence that Ubuntu is a bigger malware risk than any other OS.
I don’t think people should avoid Ubuntu because their app store had the same problem so many others do, but I do think the fact that they make promises about the security of the Snap Store while also making the backend and review process less open than other Linux app stores is worth noting. Not to say there aren’t security incidents with other distros worth noting, but considering the popularity of Ubuntu, it’s not surprising it’s a bigger target.
Snap as a packaging system is superior to Flatpak, considering it can even sandbox system applications. Snap Store hosting 1-2 bad programs due to audit lapses has no repercussions on Snap protocol. And Ubuntu does improve their store a lot, so I doubt it would be frequent. I think they are the first major distro to have a software store, considering how much they focus on UX and polishing alongwith GNOME Foundation.
Ubuntu has malware? WTF is this? Can anyone post anything on internet these days?
It’s in reference to recent issues the Canonical Snap Store has had with letting malware get past the review process. Since Snaps are pretty tightly integrated in Ubuntu, people with concerns about the Snap store wouldn’t want to take the risk with a distro that makes it hard to opt out of an app store with a proprietary backend that seems to have issues with letting malicious apps onto the platform. This matters more to some people than others, but I think it’s fair to question Ubuntu’s safety given the track record.
This is not a fair argument, considering how much software is provided for Ubuntu compared to any other Linux distribution. Similar things happen to Play Store and Apple App Store. Should we start calling them malware app stores?
A 2013 stint about Universal Search having internet search integrated, or the Amazon store shortcut, are not things relevant in 2024. Mint likewise had compromised ISOs publicly hosted on their website upon a compromise around 2016/17. That means Mint is more insecure and malware-y, I guess?
I don’t disagree, the person you were replying to could’ve used better language that didn’t characterize Ubuntu as malware-infested and been more specific about what they were referring to. In any event, a couple scammy malware apps that were installed at the user’s discretion are not enough evidence that Ubuntu is a bigger malware risk than any other OS.
I don’t think people should avoid Ubuntu because their app store had the same problem so many others do, but I do think the fact that they make promises about the security of the Snap Store while also making the backend and review process less open than other Linux app stores is worth noting. Not to say there aren’t security incidents with other distros worth noting, but considering the popularity of Ubuntu, it’s not surprising it’s a bigger target.
Snap as a packaging system is superior to Flatpak, considering it can even sandbox system applications. Snap Store hosting 1-2 bad programs due to audit lapses has no repercussions on Snap protocol. And Ubuntu does improve their store a lot, so I doubt it would be frequent. I think they are the first major distro to have a software store, considering how much they focus on UX and polishing alongwith GNOME Foundation.