Can somebody explain to me why using mint means
>muh botnet
Mint got hacked because it's a shit tier distro.
>>53574484
Ok thanks
>>53574464
Mint website was hacked and the 64bit cinnamon download link was changed to point to a trojan-ized iso hosted on a Bulgarian server.
>>53574547
Is the 32 bit version good? Cause I had a 32 bit iso downloaded a while back for back up
>>53574464
>website and forum got hacked
>turns out they were using ~6 character passwords with the word "mint" in them for some of their stuff
>website was modified to redirect to a different ISO with a trojan in it
>unrelated to that hack, the distro wouldn't allow you to upgrade from the old version of GPG they used (as parts of the OS were dependent on the old version), which was so old that it broke compatibility with other software
The whole thing stinks of amateurs who don't know or care much about security.
In addition to what was already said here
https://lwn.net/Articles/676664/
>>53574897
>amateurs who don't know or care much about security.
aaaaaaaaaaand is the most used distro on distrowatch
>>53574464
>>53574484
also
GLIBCed
L
I
B
C
ed
>>53574464
Despite being based on ubuntu LTS it has painfully dumbed-down security because devs are bunch of lazy amateurs
f you still have the burnt DVD or USB stick, boot a computer or a virtual machine offline (turn off your router if in doubt) with it and let it load the live session.
Once in the live session, if there is a file in /var/lib/man.cy, then this is an infected ISO.
>>53575190
Highest page hit ranking on distrowatch.
>counted by unique visitors first click per day.
Rolling release users aren't going to check distrowatch every day for a week to see if a new iso is available.
> not checking hashes when downloading isos
>>53575205
Compiler fixed in 24 hours retard
>>53574464
They just rebranded Ubuntu with their own de.
Ubuntu mate is significantly better if you don't like unity.
Plus at least Ubuntu contributes upstream, mint does nothing to help Ubuntu.
>>53576045
Why should they want to help Ubuntu? Canonical has proven hostile to Mint's devs and the direction they want to follow. Mint is slowly going its own way
>>53574464
It doesn't. It's typical meme-ing from /g/. The website got compromised, the ISO was replaced with a backdoored ISO, and as soon as the devs noticed it (pretty quickly) they worked on resolving the breach and kept the community updated at every step, not just showing up at the end to say it was fixed.
They handled it like you're supposed to handle a security breach. Keeping everyone posted on progress, and switfly resolving the issue, taking measures to avoid the same thing to happen again
Mint is a perfectly good distro if you want a better Ubuntu with things working right out of the box, and is actually what I recommend any Windows user looking to try out Linux.
>b-but muh security updates
The Update Manager by default only shows you packages that have been tested and verified to be safe to the stability of Mint, since precisely one of the big differences in design philosophy between Ubuntu and Mint is that Ubuntu seeks to be bleeding edge and Mint prioritizes stability. If you prefer to get all the unverified updates that are being pushed to Ubuntu as well, you can do that easily by selecting it in your Update Manager preferences.
All the hate that Mint is going to get from /g/ boils down to three greentexts.
>babby distro! (go use another distro that fits your needs, no one is stopping you)
>the security breach on the website! (which was resolved swiftly and very honestly)
>muh security updates lagging behind! (you can enable upstream updates that are marked unsafe to be downloaded in the fucking menu, you don't even have to do anything complicated)
>>53576655
>canonical has proven hostile towards mint devs
Someone else uses your distro, slaps their own de on top, claims its their own product.
They contribute nothing upstream, they make your distro look like shit because of poor security.
You'd be pretty hostile too anon
>>53576902
Basing your distro from another distro is nothing to be hostile about, anon.
Remember, it's fucking free software, concerns about "stealing your product" aren't exactly valid here.
Anyone can fork anyone's shit and move it in a different direction, you're not obligated to contribute upstream to the original project. And how are you giving Ubuntu itself a bad rep if your fork of Ubuntu has less up-to-date security? That makes zero sense, anon.
>>53576942
>basing your distro from another distro is nothing to be hostile about
But that's not the issue.
It's the way the mint development team treated Ubuntu at the start and how they're making Ubuntu look bad within the Linux community now.
Why was mint even necessary?
I've never had Ubuntu not work out of the box for me.
>>53577026
enlighten me to how the mint dev team treated Ubuntu at the start, because I don't know about its genesis. And in what way is Mint making Ubuntu look bad nowadays? It's just another popular easy to use distro. It's not like there's an open war between them both.
You could ask yourself why is X distro necessary, and the answer will always be: because that's the whole point of linux distros, for there to be flavors for every taste.
I moved from Ubuntu to Mint because I just like it better. It's simple as that
All the ubuntufags mad at mint cuz mint overtook them as the most popular distro. Canonnical are a bunch of greedy jews that sold their entire base to amazon and turned ubuntu into botnet. Mint devs hates jews and thats why it gets hate from pc sjw /g/
>mint makes ubuntu looks bad
>trying to cloud canonicals amazon fiasco
>>53575639
> Assuming the site with the hash hasn't been compromised.
>>53574484
>Being mentally handicapped
>>53574753
Just use the 64-bit version unless you have a good reason not to. The hack affected the 64-bit iso for maybe a day.
>>53577670
>most popular distro
Not by a long shot. Google uses Ubuntu for workstation use, and Wikipedia uses ubuntu server. The fastest supercomputer in the world right now is a chinese machine that runs Ubuntu. I'm not a fan of Canonical and a lot of their decisions (eg. Mir instead of wayland), but they've become a well known and established distro within the technology world.
>>53578220
Don't forget nasa also uses Ubuntu
>>53576817
See >>53574897, the was a lot more wrong than just their website getting breached. Their 6 character passwords that include the name of their distro and them making their distro require an old version of GPG that broke compatibility with other programs that would use GPG are both major issues that show they don't give a shit about security.
>Linux mint
Kek
