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for security because sometimes they force you to use a specific version of certain dependencies that often times are outdated but I’m wondering why that would matter if it was truly sandboxed and isolated.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

  • GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    There are vulnerabilities found in Flatpak’s sandboxing all the time so it’s pretty much broken. The opening speed on HDD systems is really really bad too. That’s why I only use Flatpak to install software that’s not available in my distro’s repos. Though I use Arch (btw) so distro packages being old isn’t an issue for me.

    • someonesmall@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        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
          1
          ·
          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.