Epic. The same company whose store client / launcher has been caught snooping around hard drives and collecting user data from unrelated software. The same company whose “online services” code is often included in games they distribute, collecting an excessive amount of information from computers that run them. The same company whose CEO has proudly and loudly bashed Linux for years.
No thanks.
Those aren’t free games. They’re surveillance tools.
Can you detail specifically why it isn’t sufficient? Because I thought you could restrict which directories a Flatpak software could access down to the level of single, specific directories?
Epic. The same company whose store client / launcher has been caught snooping around hard drives and collecting user data from unrelated software. The same company whose “online services” code is often included in games they distribute, collecting an excessive amount of information from computers that run them. The same company whose CEO has proudly and loudly bashed Linux for years.
No thanks.
Those aren’t free games. They’re surveillance tools.
It’s a flatpak, review permissions and deny as much as needed.
Flatpak’s sandboxing is not sufficient to protect against hostile software.
And even if it were, I would not be inclined to run software from Epic.
Can you detail specifically why it isn’t sufficient? Because I thought you could restrict which directories a Flatpak software could access down to the level of single, specific directories?
Yes. I’m happy it’s a FlatPak, but I’m still not 100% sure I understand and trust flatpak’s sandbox to put Epic Games Launcher on my PC.
I’m way more likely to trust it as a FlatPak than any other way.
But I think I’m still at no, because it’s Epic.