Linux

48313 readers

841 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz

I have a question about flatpak (lemm.ee)

submitted 1 month ago by BobGnarley@lemm.ee to c/linux@lemmy.ml

32 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I see that it can be slower because of having all the dependencies included with the flatpak itself instead of relying solely on whats installed on the system. I read that this means it isolates or sandboxes itself from the rest of the system.

Does this not mean that it can't infect the rest of the system even if it had malware?

I have seen people say that it isnt good for security because sometimes they force you to use a specific version of certain dependencies that often times are outdated but I'm wondering why that would matter if it was truly sandboxed and isolated.

Do they mean that installing flatpak itself is a security risk or that also specific flatpaks can be security risks themselves?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (2 children)

In short: No. It's getting better, but Flatpak is by no means secure. Think of it as a Windows .exe or .msi with some (not that hardened) rights management.

In addition, Flatpaks afe often community made and not even "signed" (which is not really a thing in Flatpak to begin with (yet) ((afaik))).

Something really secure would be a container, something really, really secure would be a VM, something really, really, really secure would be a separate machine. Flatpak is less secure than the least secure thing in this enumeration.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 4 points 4 weeks ago

I don't think they have bad security. It should be impossible to actually break with the sandbox with the currently known information. The vulnerability I could see is human related. The sandbox can't help you if you give it your login information.

[–] Atemu@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Flatpaks are containers. They do have a lot of holes though.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 4 weeks ago

They have there own tradeoffs. The weakness is usually the user.