Another win for snaps

[gene heskett]

On 9/15/24 08:56, Ralf Mardorf via ubuntu-users wrote:
> On Sun, 2024-09-15 at 08:22 -0400, Sam Varshavchik wrote:
>> snaps, appimage, etc, package the application together with all
>> dependencies that it requires. That's the basic idea.
> 
> Roughly speaking and only from vague memory, snaps provide undisputed
> isolation, while the security of the flatpak sandboxing is disputed.
> This doesn't mean that the more secure snap approach does make snaps
> secure. The problem with this approach is, that if you install 50 snaps,
> they might use 50 different versions of the same dependencies, which is
> a security hell, even with good isolatiion. An appimage is comparable to
> all those little things installed to /opt/. What they all have in common
> is that they are not dependent on the packages provided by a
> distribution, but only snap and flatpak add a security layer, appimages
> don't.
> 
Thanks Ralf, always good to hear from you.

Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
  soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
  - Louis D. Brandeis