This flatpak debate is a hell of a lot of theatre.
We have a published flatpak app, we could slip anything in, there’s no strong audit process. There is an audit process, but it’s not comprehensive.
The requirements are trivial to meet, and we did practically nothing to meet them. It’s supposed to be easy.
This is one of these scenarios where everyone is technically correct.
Our flatpak downloads and executes binaries, none of this extra security and sandboxing mentioned is relevant or usable.
when it comes down to it, all these parties either ship something broken as fuck or insecure, and end users have to deal with it either way
The Fedora maintainers shipped broken software, they should be the ones to explain themselves
They can’t be perfect. Its a case of do you trust fedora or flatpak for your packaging needs. Personally i trust fedora and flatpak but use fedora.
Why would I trust Fedora over the developers of the package?
There are some devs that I trust to package sure. But when im downloading apps from the discover store I dont really know or care who packaged it. I just want to download the app with some peace of mind. Not all the apps on flathub are packaged by the devs.
In the flathub repo, we trust that flathub checked these packages. In the fedora flatpak repo we trust that fedora checked these packages.
Personally I do trust the fedora team to provide me secure packages more than I trust the flathub repo. You dont have to and thats fine. One of the reasons I like the fedora repo is that the check the libs used by packages and try to get them updated when they have security vulnerabilities.
