ᥫ᭡ 𐑖ミꪜᴵ𝔦 ᥫ᭡@feddit.org to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 year ago...message-squaremessage-square32linkfedilinkarrow-up173file-text
arrow-up167message-square...ᥫ᭡ 𐑖ミꪜᴵ𝔦 ᥫ᭡@feddit.org to Linux@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-21 year agomessage-square32linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squarecorsicanguppy@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down8·2 years agoAs someone formerly involved in security at the enterprise OS development scope, I consider one less Flatpak to be an improvement in security and consistency. Well done!
minus-squareᥫ᭡ 𐑖ミꪜᴵ𝔦 ᥫ᭡@feddit.orgOPlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8arrow-down2·2 years agodeleted by creator
minus-squareCommunist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyzlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9arrow-down1·edit-22 years agopeople say this all the time but the reasons they give are always nonsense in my experience, sandboxing alone makes flatpak better
minus-squaresunzu2@thebrainbin.orgBanned from communitylinkfedilinkarrow-up7·2 years agoIt would be nice if @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca clarified
minus-squareItsapersonn@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoI would be interested in knowing why. Isn’t the sandboxing supposed to make security better?
As someone formerly involved in security at the enterprise OS development scope, I consider one less Flatpak to be an improvement in security and consistency.
Well done!
deleted by creator
people say this all the time but the reasons they give are always nonsense in my experience, sandboxing alone makes flatpak better
It would be nice if @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca clarified
I would be interested in knowing why. Isn’t the sandboxing supposed to make security better?