• octopus_ink@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    I’ve heard all the arguments about how these new packaging formats are supposed to make things easy for developers and for users with different use cases than my own (apparently), but I will continue to avoid them until they have further matured. I’m relieved that this is still possible.

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 months ago

      The idea is good I think but the implementation has only ever caused me problems and seems to have a bunch of frustrating edge cases.

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        I’ve been using snaps for a few years now and while they still could use some improvements, the snaps I’m currently using seem to be fairly indistinguishable from deb-based packaging thanks to bug fixes they have done over the years. I think the idea of containerized applications is a good one, I think it actually can be safer. Performance is also fine for me with snap applications even like Firefox snap startup speed, although I’m using an R9 5900x and Gen 4 M2 NVMe SSD so maybe that’s why, or maybe they really have improved the snap software and it is just as fast now for the most part.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    8 months ago

    Maybe adding a proprietary later to an open-source OS was a bad idea (for end users)?

  • eveninghere@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 months ago

    I have this unpopular thought: If I had to choose between Canonical’s Snap Store and Apple App Store…

    • AChiTenshi@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I would imagine the recent xz backdoor discovery spooked them a bit. So now they are going to check things.

      We shall see if it continues or not.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    After repeatedly suffering issues with scam apps making it onto the Snap Store, Canonical maker of Ubuntu Linux have now decided to manually look over submissions.

    I’ve covered the issues with the Snap Store a few times now like on March 19th when ten scam crypto apps appeared, got taken down and then reappeared under a different publisher.

    Also earlier back in February there was an issue where a user actually lost their wallet as a result of a fake app.

    Multiple fake apps were also put up back in October last year as well, so it was a repeating issue that really needed dealing with properly.

    So to try and do something about it, Canonical’s Holly Hall has posted on their Discourse forum about how “The Store team and other engineering teams within Canonical have been continuously monitoring new snaps that are being registered, to detect potentially malicious actors” and that they will now do manual reviews whenever people try to register “a new snap name”.

    Hopefully this will begin to put an end to scam apps making it into the Snap Store and onto machines running Ubuntu and any other Linux distribution that enables Snap packages.


    The original article contains 238 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 18%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • wiki_me@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    How is that not a security theater? , you just need to :

    • publish a good snap
    • change it to malware after it is approved
    • profit

    The extra cost added to override this is fairly small, i don’t think it will help.