this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2024
430 points (99.1% liked)

Open Source

31877 readers
70 users here now

All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!

Useful Links

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This doesn't surprise me at all... Just like bots in games. Selling a service that benefits another. Its shady, but definitely believable.

Also, what if this is an actual viable way to "market" for an open source project?

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/over-31-million-fake-stars-on-github-projects-used-to-boost-rankings

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gravitas_deficiency 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

But the main point is that good and well-written code doesn’t need this sort of misdirection, nor would the authors generally engage in this sort of thing

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You seem to imply bad programmers use these services to star-boost their otherwise mediocre code. That might be the case, but there are other –at least conceivable, if not yet proven– use cases for these star-boosting services, such as typosquatting, the promotion of less secure software as part of supply chain attacks (with organizations sticking to vulnerable libraries or frameworks in the erroneous belief that they are more popular and better maintained than alternatives, for example) and plain malware distribution.

[–] gravitas_deficiency 3 points 4 days ago

I mean… I was sort of taking “good” code to imply “not malicious”, in addition to it being written well. But yeah, I completely agree, in the context of attack vectors you mention.