On Tue, 31 Mar 2020 08:45:03 -0400 John Sullivan <j...@wjsullivan.net> wrote:
> Informing people is always important, but please let's not exaggerate > the issue. Replicant very clearly shows dedication to its principles > over popularity. I think it could help if I give a bit more details on my thought process here. I think it's up to the people to know how important the Replicant limitations are for them. I don't live their lives, so I can't decide that for them. So instead I try to inform people of what could potentially be problematic for them. I assume that they know way better than me what is important for them and what is not. As for security in general I find it more and more disturbing that "security" assumes a threat model that is relative to the industry needs. For instance what is deemed a "security issue" and got a CVE and is unfixable might even be good for free software in some cases. In addition to that, it also depends on the live of people. For some people having their location made public can result in them being killed. For other having their sexual orientation be made public can also result in them being killed. Threat models can vary a lot depending on the people lives. Denis.
pgpgwTQHMaIL6.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Replicant mailing list Replicant@osuosl.org https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/replicant