TLS also would not prevent someone if he already has access to the server to deliver malicious payload, encrypted or not plays no role, but let it go, you guys are bunch of amateurs. Your statement that they do not have TLS is wrong too which I debunked.
I also do not wrongfully imply that because Lemmy does not support 2FA that it is automatically attackable and then smear your platform all over the place because I am not happy with best practices.
It is not more or less secure than downloading unknown database to your PC and then executing it, creating doomsday scenarios is disrespectful and unproven. Especially on Linux ransomware is more ineffective than on e.g. Windows, so your horror scenarios, what if … is nonsense.
You clearly dont know what remote code execution is, or even what TLS is for.
I think you do not understand that abusing it requires more than just executing a random script, which you swipe under the carpet because it benefits your wrong conclusion. If you would know, you would realize the script would just crash, misbehave etc. it depends on platform, their protection mechanism etc.
TLS also would not prevent someone if he already has access to the server to deliver malicious payload, encrypted or not plays no role, but let it go, you guys are bunch of amateurs. Your statement that they do not have TLS is wrong too which I debunked.
I also do not wrongfully imply that because Lemmy does not support 2FA that it is automatically attackable and then smear your platform all over the place because I am not happy with best practices.
It is not more or less secure than downloading unknown database to your PC and then executing it, creating doomsday scenarios is disrespectful and unproven. Especially on Linux ransomware is more ineffective than on e.g. Windows, so your horror scenarios, what if … is nonsense.