[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;46125775]Hoping there's no NSA backdoor.[/QUOTE]
It's British...
Unless if I'm not aware of some British and American collusion going on here...
[QUOTE=ClarkWasHere;46127361]It's British...
Unless if I'm not aware of some British and American collusion going on here...[/QUOTE]
Five eyes.
[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;46125775]Hoping there's no NSA backdoor.[/QUOTE]
Well, if they aren't going to make it available under at least some open source license (or better yet, a free software license), then you might as well assume it to be the case.
[QUOTE=ClarkWasHere;46127361]Unless if I'm not aware of some British and American collusion going on here...[/QUOTE]
[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_Communications_Headquarters]GCHQ[/url].
[QUOTE=mastersrp;46131430]Well, if they aren't going to make it available under at least some open source license (or better yet, a free software license), then you might as well assume it to be the case.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't necessarily stop the implementation running on different code than the displayed source.
They should name the OS "ARM Strength".
[QUOTE=Stonecycle;46137350]Doesn't necessarily stop the implementation running on different code than the displayed source.[/QUOTE]
Nope, but then you can compile your own implementation and not rely on it being a different binary. Heck, you could even recompile the whole shabam and check for any differences between the implementation and your compilation output.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.