Alright FOSSfags, prove to me that linux doesn't have any NSA backdoors.
Because I didn't install any?
Ba dum ts!
>"I am a retarded shitposter who doesn't understand that the burden of proof is on the person making claims"
prove that it does
Of course it doesn't, go check for yourself if you don't believe me :^)
>>53632477
>latin buzzwords
prove that it doesn't
>>53632502
an operating system has hundreds of millions of lines of code
if you think that the NSA can't slip a few in there then you're retarded
It doesn't need backdoors, the front door is wide open.
SELINUX is literally NSA
>>53632448
Actually, no. You have to prove that it *does*.
>>53632511
>prove that it doesn't
just read the source code, it doesn't have any backdoors
>>53632448
Linux doesn't do this
>>53632511
>download source
>ctrl+f "backdoor"
>0 results
this is basic shit my man
>>53632597
>>53632448
There you go
>>53632477
>"I am a retarded shitposter who doesn't understand that the burden of proof is on the person making claims"
prove that it is
>>53632597
Winfags BTFOOOOOOOOOO
>>53632682
>Winfags
Please
Win cucks*
>>53632597
http://wq.apnic.net/apnic-bin/whois.pl?do_search=Search&searchtext=68.142.103.1
>>53632640
>This post will go underrated
>>53632511
They probably don't even need to slip back doors in to get what they want. They have some very talented people working for them.
The FBI on the other hand apparently doesn't know jack shit about technology.
>if you can't prove that it doesn't exist, then it exists
OP is creationist, confirmed
>>53632717
More like underappreciated
>>53632471
Ayy lmao
>>53634713
Mah niggy
>>53632597
>slaps wireshark on default windows 10 install
>look random traffic
>not possible for a modern operating system to be talking on the internet
>please prove to me something doesn't exist
You didn't do well at school did you
>>53632502
>using the smiley with a carat nose
>not using Linux libre
You can make sure everything that's open source in the kernel is NSA-free, but not the binary blobs
>>53634828
I wouldn't be able to use linux if it was only libre.
Fuck off retard.
>>53634835
It's unusable with the proprietary binaries.
>>53634835
What?
There's plenty of systems built off of Linux-libre (i.e. any FSF endorsed distro)
>>53634857
Not if your hardware doesn't work without the proprietary binaries.
>>53634865
Maybe, mine wouldn't work though.
>>53634796
>>53633001
>>53632608
>>53632554
>>53632552
Says the very same faggots who assert that Linux doesn't have backdoors in every single Windows thread with no proof
>>53634880
9 times out of 10 it doesn't work even if you have the binaries. The Linux Nvidia driver sucks compared to the Windows one.
>>53634913
You're not very bright are you anon?
>>53634918
Works 10/10 if I have the binary firmware, there is literally no support for my hardware that is free.
If that is the sacrifice I have to make that is fine by me, I would rather use that than use a whole closed source OS. Free faggits forget real world situations.
>>53632448
Come to my house. I'll read to you every line of code.
>>53632529
Are you sure you know what selinux is?
>>53632477
>has no counterpoint or otherwise is too dumb to provide a simple answer to the question
>attempts to cover his ass by crying about logical phalluses
What about the ctrl-z backdoor that gets a shell?
>>53632640
/thread
>>53632448
Kernel audits.
There is no backdoor.
ITT: Faggots who can't write a Google search, much less read a fucking OS
>>53632448
Argumentum ad ignorantiam.
FLOSS is at least publicly verifiable and subject to independant code audits. That's not to say backdoors aren't possible, it just makes far less likely.
Closed source on the other hand isn't publicly verifiable and therefore isn't subject to independent code audits. That's not to say backdoors are installed by default, it just makes it more likely.
Here's Stallman's take on Windows for example: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/malware-microsoft.html
>>53632640
>muh security
>>53634810
>Being this new to respond to it.
>>53634810
https://www.wordnik.com/words/carat
https://www.wordnik.com/words/caret
Idiot.
>>53639905
>FLOSS
>>53639938
You literally missed his point you ultimate retard
>>53640068
what
>>53640053
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#FLOSS
>>53632597
Do what exactly?
Huge amounts of that traffic is to the local LAN.
Not saying windows 10 doesn't do dodgy shit but having a scrolling wireshark capture running while you click randomly in windows is totally meaningless.
>>53632597
/thread
>>53632448
https://cdn.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/linux-4.5.tar.xz
It's a bit long, but you can read it and see it yourself.
>>53632448
It doesn't even matter because there is Intel ME and microcode backdoors are a thing. No matter how hard you compile your ganoo you are fucked because you run on compromised hardware.
If neckbeards were truly interested in their privacy, they would push for open hardware (risc-v). But they are not.
>>53640882
how do hardware backdoors even work?
>>53640882
Yep. Things are in a sad, sad state now. x86 can no longer really be trusted, unless somehow a new company appears on the market.
But most probably privacy-focused people will have to move to something RISC-based.
>>53640908
have you ever put a doorknob up your butt? it's kinda like that.
>>53632448
Try a stallman approved distro, you will have access to the 100% of the source code of your programs.
So maybe you try starting from there.
(and don't forget to have a non backdoored cpu)
>>53640882
Don't forget the bios
>>53640908
Just execute a fancy sequence of instructions that triggers the backdoor. From JavaScript or from font rendering code, etc.
http://danluu.com/cpu-backdoors/
Intel me is even easier, its a separate processor with access to your ram and network. Do you believe there is no backdoor that gets triggered by some special packet? (^:
>>53640932
http://riscv.org/
>>53640941
What good does having access to the source code do you?
There isn't going to be any NSA_Backdoor() in there. It would be some incredible subtle very difficult to spot programming error that even when you found it would be plausibly deniable as a backdoor.
I think it's naive to think there aren't intentional backdoors in FOSS, there are so many moving parts that you can slip one into.
>>53641127
Yup, there is no absolute sec, only relative
>>53634913
You want proof? The proof is the code itself. You (or someone knowledgeable whom you trust) can look at the code and follow it along logically and see that it doesn't do what you're asserting it does.
Open Source is just like reading Terms of Service, except instead of trusting a company's word when they say "we won't do this or this" you can see for yourself that the program doesn't do it.
>>53632597
>people who dont understand networking in 3, 2, ...
>>53640959
>using the backward smiley with a carat nose
>>53642112
See >>53640013
Idiot.
>>53632640
/thread
Taylor Swift has a gaping backdoor.
>>53632597
after 10 seconds into that shit the traffic isn't even fucking microsoft's, its the users.
not to mention, that shit could be windows update or activation for all anyone knows.
grow a brain. the kernel whether it be linux or windows could simply hide traffic from being seen on the local machine anyways
>>53632554
>just read the source code, it doesn't have any backdoors
Just like freetards did with truecrypt?
No one read the sourcecode for years, and it turned out to be rotten. If no one checked the code of a single encryption program, then I doubt the code of an entire operating system has been peer reviewed.
>>53632448
If you don't want to read it all, just listen to it.
http://www.linux.fm/
>>53632640
in the same way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Star_OS
sony like it
>>53637532
OP is too dumb to provide reasons why linux sucks other than memes
>>53632448
https://www.kernel.org/
There, take a look. No one has found one yet.
>>53632448
>Alright FOSSfags, prove to me that linux doesn't have any NSA backdoors.
Snowden uses it.
./sudo tcpdump
>>53644701
As much as I appreciate what Snowden did, your argument remains an ad populum. Not OP, btw.
>>53632448
The big difference is that if you care (and some people/teams get payed a lot of money to care for some applications) that you can take a look at, modify and compile your own code.
With proprietary binaries all you get is a blob that is orders of magnitude more difficult to dissect.
Compiler 'backdoors' are something to consider though.
>>53634794
http://65.52.108.116.ipaddress.com/
>>53632448
this
>>53632511
ctrl + f
NSA
ever heard of it?
dumbass
>>53632597
w10 users on suicide watch
>>53641435
Reading through and understanding the Linux codebase enough to assert that it's free of intentional backdoors takes months if not years.
