| ▲ | mixedbit 8 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||
An extension from a trusted, non anonymous developer which is released as open source is a good signal that the extension can be trusted. But keep in mind that distribution channels for browser extensions, similarly to distribution channels for most other open source packages (pip, npm, rpm), do not provide any guarantee that the package you install and run is actually build verbatim from the code which is open sourced. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | jakub_g 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||
Actually, npm supports "provenance" and as it eliminated long lived access tokens for publishing, it encourages people to use "trusted publishing" which over time should make majority of packages be auto-provenance-vefified. https://docs.npmjs.com/trusted-publishers#automatic-provenan... | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | m4rtink 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||
If the RPM/deb comes from a Linux distribution then there is a good chance there is a separate maintainer and the binary package is always built from the source code by the distro. Also if the upstream developer goes malicious there is a good chance at least one of the distro maintainers will notice and both prevent the bad source code being built for the distro & notify others. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||