A Bitcoin investor was recently scammed out of 9 Bitcoin (worth around $490K) in a fake “Exodus wallet” desktop application for Linux, published in the Canonical Snap Store. This isn’t the first time; if nothing changes, it likely won’t be the last.
It is on the FlatHub as well.
That’s is the genuine one. There is a genuine company called Exodus for Crypto. The problem is that a scammer made their own clone and nobody verified whether they really are from the Exodus company.
If you check the manifest on Flathub you’ll see they verified it belongs to the real Exodus
It’s produced without upstream involvement but does seem to be legit so far. I placed a post seeking clarification about the Flatpak situation on Reddit 6 months ago. I quickly got a response after posting it. However, the response was from some scammers and I never got a response from the company behind it itself.
I mean FlatHub isn’t safe in general. You could just target someone downloading the package and give them a malicious package instead. FlatHub doesn’t check sigs, so its a hot mess
The repo is gpg signed. I don’t know why you think thats not sufficient.
“packages” don’t exist like traditional distros. Its a large repo of data.
Point me to the documentation that describes this
https://ostreedev.github.io/ostree/man/ostree.html - GPG verification section
This isn’t even the right project’s documentation
… I assumed you knew the basics.
Flatpak uses ostree for all data. https://docs.flatpak.org/en/latest/under-the-hood.html
I’m disappointed you criticize the project so harshly with no knowledge of it.
No, my point is that if flat pak doesn’t document that they cryptographically verify the authenticity of packages, then they dont.
Even the ostree docs say that it supports it gpg encryption. It supports it. It doesn’t enforce it. That depends on the implementation.
I will continue to harshly criticize projects that leave users vulnerable. Want to prove me wrong? Link me to the flat pak docks that clearly say that all packages are cryptographically verified after download and before upload.
They seem to be doing more on that side than Canonical is. But I agree, it should be MANDATORY that the developer is thoroughly vetted and approved and the code run and checked Brexit before publishing.
I hope this is a wake up call for Snaps and Flatpaks.
Apps from the repo have the security, which is why I always default to the distribution repo
it should be MANDATORY that the developer is thoroughly vetted and approved and the code run and checked Brexit before publishing.
Brexit?
Damn autocorrect…
That one apparently is legit: https://floss.social/@sonny/111966204515001155
That is an absolutely fascinating article on the technical operation of a scam app. A definite warning to us all. Also I was very interested to read the terms and conditions of the Snap Store, specifically section 14: Limitation of Liability (which could be titled “Sorry, You’re Fucked”).
I don’t like bitcoin, it’s an environmental disaster that had potential but has turned into a highly volatile speculative device beloved by libertarians, grifters, and scammers. I do feel for the person who lost the coins, that cannot be a very nice experience to deal with.
LOL, you should have DYOR and used a cold wallet. You clearly don’t understand the complexities of Bitcoin, have fun staying poor!
/s
Lol
