You do verify your downloads, don't you anon?
nah codex does it for melittle fucker verifies WAY TOO MUCH actually and it's fucking annoying, I have to constantly remind him to stop fucking sha-256ing everything in a 10 mile radius multiple times
>>110113334No, since I'm wintoddler and don't have such tools. But I'm not worrying since good daddy microslop signs executables for me.
>>110113351certutil
>>110113334What is this disgu...>kubuntuOh it loonix kek
i have never once verified a hash or actually looked at the code of packages or open source utilities i run
>>110113334Checking hash isn't enough, you need to verify signature with a trusted key.
>not YOLO'lly thrusting into rndm orifices
>>110113351Because there are definitely no fake signatures right
>>110113580Of course not! All keys are provided to trustworthy agents by Microsoft. You don't trust Microsoft?
>>110113334i mean i only download off usenet so by definition yes cause without that it wouldn't be able to download anything
I just use Windows Defender Smart Screen
>>110113350dem clankers are paranoid like that
>>110113334If someone hacks the website to distribute malware he can also modify the checksums on that website. Retard.
>>110113590>>110113351sir please redeem arch
>>110113334yeah, I run itwhy, do you download things just for fun without ever opening them?
>>110113350This never happens to me
>>110113334You do use BTRFS with DUP and ECC RAM, right?
>>110114242oh no, a bit flipped in one of my cat memes!
nothing ever happens
>>110113334Yes, but not because I'm paranoid about security but because I've someone managed to download corrupted ISO's several times.
You will never be safe, unless you manually review every line of code, then manually compile it. Otherwise you're trusting in pre-compiled binaries, which is like trusting Microsoft or Apple that if they say it's kosher, then it's kosher, and that's just not the FOSS way.
>>1101133517zip does it through the explorer menu. It's actually fantastic. I use it + virustotal to check everything I download.
>>110116006How shit is your internet connection and/or ISPs infrastructure? >>110113422>>110113836This. Checksums are just for checking for corrupted files, not their authenticity.
>>110113334If someone can modify the file download, then they can modify the hash on the website.You need trusted keypairs for real security.
>>110116879Bad ram can corrupt downloads too. Or 'borderline' ram.
Why can't the file just check this itself without me having to do anything?
>>110116918If you care about that, then you'd buy ECC ram.
>>110116955You can make it such that it does this itself automatically.But this doesn't just happen because they assume if you're downloading from them, it's already legitimate.
>>110116975Next build I will...you know if prices ever go back to something reasonable.
>>110113334I verify my ISO downloads for OpenWRT and Debian, yes.
>>110113351Just use cygwinIt just werx
>>110113334never ever.not sure over decades of internet I had an issue with that
Not really. If the download breaks and corrupts a file, it usually becomes pretty apparent when it fails to work properly (at which point, I do check. If the file is malicious, then usually the source that hosted the file was compromised, in which case the fingerprint is also compromised anyway so it's pointless.
