I see that it can be slower because of having all the dependencies included with the flatpak itself instead of relying solely on whats installed on the system. I read that this means it isolates or sandboxes itself from the rest of the system.

Does this not mean that it can’t infect the rest of the system even if it had malware?

I have seen people say that it isnt good for security because sometimes they force you to use a specific version of certain dependencies that often times are outdated but I’m wondering why that would matter if it was truly sandboxed and isolated.

Do they mean that installing flatpak itself is a security risk or that also specific flatpaks can be security risks themselves?

  • someonesmall
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s still better than no sandbox at all, isn’t it? And who installs their OS on an HDD in 2024?

    • GolfNovemberUniform
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s still better than no sandbox at all, isn’t it?

      I guess so.

      And who installs their OS on an HDD in 2024?

      Those who earn less than $5k a month (aka 80+% of people in the world).

      • pmc@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Nearly all of my friends make less than $5k per month, and all of them have SSDs as the boot drive in their computer.

        • Chewy@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Yes. 1TB SSDs can be bought new for 50€, 500GB for even less. For some people this is expensive depending in the region (e.g. I also know someone who uses an HDD). But given the price of other pc parts it isn’t something to cheap out on (a 1TB/2TB HDD is also 50€).