Open Source is an interesting alternative, which adds the possibility of collaboration and customization in the development of the software, it allows developers to use the code or part of it for their own projects, this naturally offers many advantages. Now, many times I read several clearly wrong opinions about it. OpenSource is more secure and more private than closed source, which is completely false, it is not, it is not the first time that I have discovered Trojans and other malware in OpenSource. It is true that a developer can review the code, although this is not always easy in very complex software with up to millions of lines of code, many also pointing to external scripts, which also require revision. For this reason, many developers do not do it, limiting themselves to changing certain codes to adapt it to their needs or to create their own product. For this reason, security and privacy always depends on the activity of the creator / creators and the corresponding community, if any, to detect possible infiltrations by hackers, who also have access to the code of this software. The normal user, without great knowledge, has no possibility of verification, far from passing the product through VirusTotal or the AV that he uses. You must trust the product’s TOS and PP, in many cases not much better for privacy than other proprietary products. Of course, the free argument is also false, not all OSS is free, it can even have high costs. For this reason, I think that, to maintain the freedom and the great advantages that the OpenSource movement has, to put an end to these mistaken opinions and to make users aware of the real value that this movement has, so as not to lead them to a field of disappointment.
Preferably use OpenSource, but like any other software, avoid blind trust and check the application before using it and above all, importantly, always read the TOS and PP of the product, this avoids many annoyances. Avoid products whithout updates for a long time, which shows a lack of attention on the part of the developer.
The point of Free Software is, and has been for the last 40 years, the “four freedoms”:
Notice there is no promise or guarantee that free software is bug free or has perfect security. Those are not things the free software movement promises. Of course, as a general rule free software tends to be more privacy respecting, because the point of free software is that free software works for the user, not for its developer.
It is correct that a free software license is not a magical shield that prohibits malware or privacy violation, but the free software community in general takes privacy very seriously. Anyone who has been following the Audacity fiasco knows this, and the GNU Free System Distribution Guidelines explicitly prohibit DRM, spyware, or malware.
I use free software because I want to control my technology, not because of any perceived privacy/security benefits.
As for TOS and privacy policy, these apply to network services and are orthogonal to and not a substitute for a free software license. If the software does not make connections to a network service then TOS or privacy policy is irrelevant.