the programmer is an engineer with a low qualification level who can’t detect scams.
The author of the article doesn’t appear to understand that confidence games don’t depend on how skilled someone is in their field; they are usually a statistical attack depending on a small percentage of any population being credulous about any offer at any given time.
The only way to defend against these scams is defense in depth, via publishing requirements, policies, policy review, code review and security testing.
I should also point out that OSS has come under heavy attack recently with attackers leveraging the dependency chain to trick OSS developers into installing malicious libraries that look a lot like the legitimate versions. Often they create developer identities on GitHub, create a single legitimate project, and do some legitimate commits to a range of other projects. Then they stand up another account and use it to create trojanized libraries, and then switch their now popular project to use the malicious libraries. In some cases, their popular project is a library itself, so every project with dependencies on that library automatically inherits its malicious dependency.
These days, assume that code is likely compromised no matter where it’s from, and do your reviews and testing and set your policies accordingly.
There is a simple solution to this. Just don’t use proprietary software
Yes in theory, but you have to vet the libraries you add to be really sure, even these “integrations” might be open source and still be malicious, because they prey on the lazy devs (…don’t look at me 👀) that would just look at the license and say “ah it’s MIT, all good then”.
To be honest, they would also need to be either very gullible or desperate to fall for such an offer, open source devs usually don’t go around offering get rich quick schemes
Why post in two communities without crossposting? The comments in the other thread were helpful. This is just shillposting, the way you’re doing it.
