How can you be so naive user, if it's opensource it's safe because it was peer reviewed

frogposting is cancer

Attached: 212498967_e8aabc4ea8_o.jpg (640x480, 38K)

are you trolling me or what? people just clone obscure repos all the time >What the fuck do you think happens when some one sends a pull request?
do you really think every dev can catch every bug/unwanted behavior and accept the pull request with the absolute certainty that it's bulletproof? what a brainlet

>running random obscure code on your system
That's because you are a retard.

>every dev can catch every bug
No, but the same is true for proprietary software you fucking moron. Also, this is why any decent project have requirements to reviewers (2+ reviews acking it before it is accepted), requirements to passing tests and CI etc. It is an transparent process. Meanwhile, proprietary software vendors have a tendency to let bugs slip and fuck you completely over, like Nvidia installer removing your home directory.

frog website

Chinese cartoon website

>deflecting from your own cultish behavior just because it's convenient for you
>denying that you are being controlled just because the person controlling you only makes 100 decisions per week for you now instead of 200 like he used to

see, you are the reason why freeware sucks so much fucking shill. I didn't take side with proprietary software and i agree it's shit as well but this blind trust you retards have is dangerous for everyone

>muh freeware

Attached: 1385992_2194195570633_1431255374_n.jpg (315x376, 27K)

>literally explained to you how you can see the communication between developers and maintainers and you can see for yourself the steps and the acknowledgement process
>"hurr durr blind trust"
You are just reading what you want to read. Unironically kill yourself for being a non-developer on Jow Forums.

Its a diversity website, why the hate speech?

>you have to part of a cult like me
No I don't, user. Freecult is not fren, Microsoft is not fren. Please have a thought, its important.

Attached: green frog bad.jpg (1000x1000, 104K)

Right right right, that's why all major distros run binary blobs and unaudited code like systemd. Totally trust those open source guys.

>major distros
>free software
Pick one.

Oh what I thought Linux was the way of the future.
Fuck off and come back when there's a distrobtyat works as well as Ubuntu and is 100% libre

>free software is unsafe because some free software is actually non-free and includes proprietary blobs that are hidden
So we agree then? Proprietary is unsafe and open source is inherently more safe because it is open.

>Fuck off and come back when there's a distrobtyat works as well as Ubuntu and is 100% libre
Ask again when hardware manufacturers stop using closed source code

>Oh what I thought Linux was the way of the future.
I thought we were discussing free software? Your post is the ONLY mention of Linux ITT. Also, see You're literally arguing that (some) free software projects are bad because they include proprietary blobs that can not be trusted, which is ironically making the case for free software.

>distrobtyat
uwu

Stop delegating your shortcomings.
Open source is not inherently safe unless qualified people audit every commit ever and guarantee safety with their names and careers on it. Not every open source project is as safeguarded as linux

Okay show me the full audit and analysis of systemd please.

>fucking implying you go through the entire process every time you clone a repo
actually considering that you likely larp here since 2004 and now are 45yo waiting for your parents to die so you can escalate from basement to ground floor

The leader of my shit doesn't eat his own foot fungus.

>Open source is not inherently safe unless qualified people audit every commit
Which they do, see all open source projects. It's so painfully obvious that you've never actually contributed to a project before (or even used git professionally). Random people don't have push rights to repositories, either you follow the Cathedral approach (where only trusted maintainers have access) or you follow the Bazaar approach (where anyone can submit a patch, but patches are reviewed by maintainers and have to pass a bunch of tests before they are acked and later include).

Even if mistakes makes it through, the fact that the process is open and tracable is a huge benefit for everyone. You can easily trace where security flaws made it in and who's responsible. With proprietary software, who knows how long it has been possible to do remote code injection through Window's broken DNS client before it was patched?

Just look at the fucking mailing lists.. Jesus christ, are you legitimately new to open source development or are you just pretending to be retarded to troll?

So naive. I have my own GitHub projects that do have bugs I'm not willing to fix. Let alone all GitHub repos with 1000 ignored or wontfix issues.
You're putting blind trust and baseless assumptions in arbitrary people. Fucking nobody just browses random repos tracing commits looking for bugs. You don't do that either

>Freecult is not fren, Microsoft is not fren. Please have a thought, its important.
no, fuck off, you are trying to spread FUD by equating your proprieturd black-box shit with projects that have intentionally put themselves out there to be audited, and it isn't working, the only one here who needs to have a thought is you

>ITT: A bunch of people who has never developed anything more advanced than fizzbuzz tell other people that open source sucks because they don't understand how it works
I swear, Jow Forums is getting stupider every year.

No no link me to it. You can't because systemd is the biggest piece of unaudited code ever

>So naive. I have my own GitHub projects that do have bugs I'm not willing to fix. Let alone all GitHub repos with 1000 ignored or wontfix issues.
All software has bugs. I never said open source was bug free, that's a fucking strawman argument and you fucking know it. My claim is that open source is inherently more safe, because the development process is open and transparent. Since you are inventing strawman and fighting them instead, I'm accepting this as an admission of defeat. Good day to you, faggot.

doesn't bother me because i don't follow his every command and mimic his behavior exactly, like you do with your leader

lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel

Here is the process explained in detail: github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/docs/CONTRIBUTING.md

Here is the wiki, which is also open and includes discussions: freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/

You're just lazy and full of preconceptions.

Most of the c++ closed source software runs with boost, an open source library.
Do you really think someone read those 1000000 plus lines of code???
Owned

*npc noises*

Hint: Proprietary software is the same except you don't get to see all the 1000 issues that were ignored or closed wontfix, and you don't get the chance to fix any of them yourself if you are able.

Wow you got owned and now forfeit? Here's the last nail for you. Explain why Linux has an order of magnitude more CVEs than openbsd. Moron

Good, I don't want people having a free pass to see all vulns.

>Wow you got owned and now forfeit?
We already established that you are pretending that I argued something I didn't.

>Explain why Linux has an order of magnitude more CVEs than openbsd.
Because no one uses openbsd, and Linux has more users and reviewers that are able to detect security flaws, instead of them just existing in the wild and no one being aware of them except people who exploit them.

That's so weak. I want actual line by line analysis. Link me to that.

Because it has multiple orders of magnitude more code and number of developers working on it. Next question please.

>Good, I don't want people to see how shitty my code is
FTFY

>We already established that you are pretending that I argued something I didn't.
are you starring at the mirror? because we haven't even mentioned or compare proprietary and you keep ranting as if we are defending it

Just pick a random pull request for fuck's sake.

Just butting in, bugs even in open source can be old. Your arguments about organization and review being only in open source are inept at best.

No. It's a cult, its not your friend but another way to control you. You can be completely for/supporting open source software that maintains user control of it without these idiotic sayings, rules of purity, and adherence to fsf doctrine.
Its a fucking cult.

You do actually because otherwise they will just be traded on black markets. Didn't they teach you why security through obscurity is poor practice?

Fuck you people are retarded. I don't have time for this. Kys, I'm out. Yes, you """win""" with your immense stupidity. Come back when you've actually worked as a developer.

>muuh black market
Not an argument.
No, openbsd just has higher coding standards. Linux is a dumpster.

>>Didn't they teach you
lmao do you really think OP made it past high school?

>idiotic sayings, rules of purity, and adherence to doctrine
ok? this has nothing to do with anything in my post and much more describes your behavior than mine, you are too spineless to say no to the botnet and can't fathom why a person with free will would say no

Closed Code is safe
Cis-shit

Attached: 0068C810-F78E-4C68-AFF8-59D25C296F7F.jpg (661x482, 32K)

t. 45yo neet

>fucking implying you go through the entire process every time you clone a repo
>actually considering that you likely larp here since 2004 and now are 45yo waiting for your parents to die so you can escalate from basement to ground floor
Yeah man, all of these totally transparent review processes take place with your proprietary software as well.

digits have spoken now GTFO cultist

Earth is flat and vaccines cause autism, right?

OP here what's wrong with you guys i haven't mentioned proprietary sw and have state 1000 times in the thread that i am not defending it. if you compare puke with shit you might say it's better but it still sucks do you get the point retards

Not surpriaing when you have 10k devs versus 5-10ish.

>Not an argument.
Right, I forgot, security isn't an argument, black hats don't exist so we should never fix or disclose CVEs to affected parties.
>openbsd just has higher coding standards.
It also is totally useless for most things. Great OS for running a router or load-balancer though.

>Great OS for running a router
>useless
never change /g

Reverse engineering is hundreds of times slower than straight looking at the source

What point? That even when the code is free as in freedom there are still bugs and people still have to do the hard work of debugging it? Was anyone ever disputing this?

Running a router isn't most things.
Yes, which is exactly why all parties need to be able to see the source

If you concerned then you can check it yourself. It's hard to add malware to the open source projects, because every commit is visible and reviewed. It's not like they just push 10000 lines per commit.

>you have to be controlled like I am
Please think, its important.

Attached: Honk Honkler.jpg (1200x1200, 153K)

>puke and shit analogies
Jesus fucking Christ...

the only cultist here is you friendo

please explain how i am controlled
in before massive strawman and shilling

What a fucking retard, lmao

I replied to two posts, I don't know who is who so I don't know if you are but I'll assume you're a freecult member. We'll start small.
Part of your thoughts and language are be controlled because you've been manipulated into believing "free as in freedom", "free", "freedom", "open source" means something it does not. Free does not mean a disparate concept from a different language (libre) that poorly/incorrectly translates to free. Its why people use libre separately because free us a incorrect translation, libre has nothing to do with fsf. Look up the definition of freedom and free, read both, they do not mean what Stallman/fsf say they do.
Saying only things under my specific approved license are pure enough to be "free", "free as in freedom" and that everything else "steals freedom". It doesn't make any sense. Both phrases are non-sensical and don't apply unless you believe free/freedom has a alternative meaning that it does not. If you believe a mit/bsd/etc. licensed software is "stealing freedom", which is impossible for it to do. If you believe that someone download and using a free(ware) but closed source program means anything, your brain doesn't work correctly.
I expect more deflection/inusation as replies like always.

thank you man for elaborating the point for us all

How do I become open source?

Just bee urself

>find interesting project with open issues or missing a feature you want
>fix issue or implement feature
>test your code
>make sure you follow the guidelines
>???
>pull request or submit patch

>replying unironically

;_;

ITT braindead Winniggers who have never touched FOSS before.