mirror of
https://github.com/xpipe-io/xpipe.git
synced 2024-11-25 09:00:26 +00:00
Update security page
This commit is contained in:
parent
405c024e9c
commit
c5901fae7d
1 changed files with 32 additions and 0 deletions
32
SECURITY.md
32
SECURITY.md
|
@ -15,6 +15,38 @@ you can make use of
|
|||
the [private security report feature](https://docs.github.com/en/code-security/security-advisories/guidance-on-reporting-and-writing/privately-reporting-a-security-vulnerability)
|
||||
of GitHub.
|
||||
|
||||
## Antivirus programs
|
||||
|
||||
### Windows
|
||||
|
||||
It may occasionally happen that Windows Defender warns and
|
||||
even sometimes deletes X-Pipe due to it identifying the application as malware.
|
||||
The reason for this is simple: The application is not signed with an EV code signing
|
||||
certificate as this would require a company for X-Pipe to be set up and would also cost around 600$+ per year.
|
||||
If X-Pipe was signed with such a certificate, as are most Windows applications distributed by companies, all warnings
|
||||
would go away automatically.
|
||||
The Windows Defender / Windows SmartScreen system is essentially pay-to-win here.
|
||||
Just paying the appropriate amount will automatically whitelist your application (even it is unsafe / essentially
|
||||
malware)
|
||||
while not paying will often blacklist it, bullying you into buying it.
|
||||
You can read more about this system in [this StackExchange post](https://security.stackexchange.com/a/139520).
|
||||
The manual whitelisting process without an EV certificate is purposely made difficult and essentially useless.
|
||||
The Windows Defender detection rules are garbage and not deterministic, i.e.
|
||||
an identical application can be flagged on one system but not the other, even though both are connected to the internet
|
||||
and the Microsoft services.
|
||||
In summary, don't rely on Windows Defender to be accurate when it comes to false-positives.
|
||||
|
||||
All artifacts of every release are automatically analyzed on VirusTotal
|
||||
and you can find the results linked at the bottom of every release.
|
||||
From there you should be able to get a better overview over the actual
|
||||
threat level of X-Pipe instead of purely relying on Windows Defender.
|
||||
|
||||
### macOS
|
||||
|
||||
On macOS the application bundle is signed and notarized and will therefore not emit any warnings.
|
||||
For macOS this process does not require a company to be
|
||||
set up and also only costs 125$ per year and is therefore much easier to accomplish.
|
||||
|
||||
## Security assumptions
|
||||
|
||||
The general assumption is that the system on which X-Pipe runs on is not badly infected.
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue