You keep confusing me saying open source is a -prerequisite- for maintainable freedom and security, and does nothing for security itself.

You only ever read the parts of what I say and continue to argue as though I think open source code is inherently secure, and continually ignore every time I AGREE with you that most open source code is shit.

Please listen when people are largely agreeing with you instead of hitting back with walls of text as though they are not.

MNT reform is mostly open in terms of everything but the CPU. That is a -great- start as it means fewer parties you have to trust. Also they support two different CPU vendors as well as an FPGA option soon. The CPU is a swappable component in an otherwise open platform. How can you dismiss that level of flexibility and user power as anything but substantial progress over the status quo? Please give people working hard for more freedom respecting hardware their due credit. Minimizing such very hard work will not win you allies.

Also yes, the Linux kernel is a security shit show to be sure, as well as mot desktop Linux distros, but -because- it is open I can heavily patch it and customize it to reduce attack surface.

Also because it is open projects like Asterinas can reference it to make an ABI compatible modern replacement is Rust which is making rapid progress!

Transparency is step 1 to any major progress in freedom and security and that is why I am a broken record demanding more of it from all projects widely used in high risk scenarios.