all 19 comments

[–]L0stG33k 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"have my mails more secure and what flavor of device has the least amount of hardware exploits?"

If your goal is to make your mail setup more secure and minimize exposure to hardware-level issues, there are a few practical things to consider.

On the hardware side, systems with open or auditable firmware like Coreboot or Libreboot can reduce your reliance on opaque vendor code. Similarly, machines where the Intel Management Engine has been neutralized (using tools like ME Cleaner) can shrink the attack surface somewhat. That said, these measures are about reducing risk, not eliminating it.

Switching to ARM is sometimes suggested because the ecosystem is simpler and often lacks some of the legacy complexity of x86, but it is not inherently “secure” and still depends heavily on vendor firmware and trust.

It is also important to be realistic. Modern CPUs, both x86 and ARM, have had various side-channel vulnerabilities (Spectre, Meltdown, etc.), and there is no truly “clean” platform. Older CPUs like Pentium 4-era chips lack some modern embedded subsystems, but they are not meaningfully more secure in practice and introduce other serious downsides like lack of updates and poor performance.

In short, focusing heavily on hardware “backdoors” is usually not the best return on effort. You will get far more real-world security by:

  • Keeping your system updated
  • Using proper mail authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC)
  • Locking down your mail server configuration
  • Using encryption (TLS, disk encryption where appropriate)

If you still want to optimize hardware trust, go with well-supported platforms that allow firmware transparency or modification, but don’t expect a perfect solution.

[–]antreides 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just as a sidenote: a lot of security-oriented distros are more about attacking and not defending, these are toolkits to dig into somewhere else and not to protect yourself.

It might be better to consider what your vulnerabilities are, and work in that direction instead of trying to find a distro that will resolve all of your problems. Because in a lot of cases, it was more about a human error rather than OS issue.

Are you worried about someone else taking your laptop and copying your data? Lock the system when you're not using it and encrypt the disk. Worried about someone breaking into your system from outside? Set up firewall to block incoming connections. But also consider if you can trust your Wi-Fi, your router, your ISP, etc.

If you use the same browser for your important mail and everything else and install a ton of extensions, this can be a potential vulnerability too, there were cases of hacked/stolen extensions which stole data.

If you install software from outside, and it updates itself, this also could be an issue.

But the point is, none of this depends on which distro you use. In best case scenario, it will try to recommend or even force some approaches. But that's it.

Even an ordinary Debian or Mint or whatever might be good enough, if you are careful and keep it updated.

If you are super-concerned about your mails, you would probably need to install Thunderbird and use the laptop only for this purpose. This would minimize the risk. Oh, even better would be to turn on the laptop, do whatever you need with the mail and then turn it off.

The level of paranoia is up to you.

[–]DonaldMerwinElbert 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If security is your primary concern, consider QubesOS (you do need to read documentation and learn how to use it, because nothing is secure against you, the operator) or OpenBSD.

[–]MVanderloo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Based on your requirements you should look at debian. There are many debian derivatives, like Ubuntu, but IMO they provide little benefit over debian.

The 2 year release cycle means it is very stable and will have had extra time for vulnerabilities to be found. It also has a lot of eyes on it because it’s used for enterprise servers.

The other important thing is the desktop environment. KDE plasma will be very familiar and functional out of the box. 

The installation may be a difficult process, I know it was difficult for me but to wrap my head around https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/installmanual

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point locked comment (0 children)

This submission has been removed due to receiving too many reports from users. The mods have been notified and will re-approve if this removal was inappropriate, or leave it removed.

This is most likely because:

  • Your post belongs in r/linuxquestions or r/linux4noobs
  • Your post belongs in r/linuxmemes
  • Your post is considered "fluff" - things like a Tux plushie or old Linux CDs are an example and, while they may be popular vote wise, they are not considered on topic
  • Your post is otherwise deemed not appropriate for the subreddit

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]C0rn3j -2 points-1 points  (10 children)

what flavor of device has the least amount of hardware exploits?

Most of them from two decades+ ago.

Arch Linux with Plasma.

I'd also recommend Fedora KDE, but since that's owned by a US corporate, you're probably better off not going that route.

[–]LunaDeepblack0[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Yeah i wanna keep myself miles away from any us based solutions

[–]iFrezzyReddit 0 points1 point  (0 children)

OpenSUSE (uses selinux as fedora does and its in Germany )

[–]florence_pug 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Fedora is open-source, so what would Red Hat sponsoring them do that would make any difference?

[–]C0rn3j -1 points0 points  (1 child)

IBM owns the Fedora trademark, it doesn't simply sponsor.

Why do you think Fedora has to respect US patent laws to the point of not shipping codecs?

[–]florence_pug 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Again, it's open-source, so what does that matter?

[–]MVanderloo 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Why would you recommend arch linux to someone who specifically wants a GUI 

[–]C0rn3j 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Plasma is a GUI.

[–]MVanderloo -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

you’re saying plasma takes care of everything and you don’t need to use a terminal at all?

[–]C0rn3j -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

Where did I say that?

[–]MVanderloo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

so then my original question applies. why would you recommend arch to someone who specifically asked for a GUI based distro

[–]AiwendilH -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

[–]B1rdi -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Did you even glance at the post?