48
Paco - The tiny package manager
(store.godotengine.org)
Welcome to the programming.dev Godot community!
This is a place where you can discuss about anything relating to the Godot game engine. Feel free to ask questions, post tutorials, show off your godot game, etc.
Make sure to follow the Godot CoC while chatting
We have a matrix room that can be used for chatting with other members of the community here
We have a four strike system in this community where you get warned the first time you break a rule, then given a week ban, then given a year ban, then a permanent ban. Certain actions may bypass this and go straight to permanent ban if severe enough and done with malicious intent
We all agree on this, the engine does exactly this, do no click the "asset store" tab tho. Never download anything from it, could be insecure. You see what I mean?
OP accepted all relevant feedback from what I can read in this thread. What pikl wrote never happened, so same story to me.
There are still a few things missing from the project, but it does not look like a big deal, and I'd really like to see it finished.
The point is not that pulling any project from the asset store is insecure. It is for any code you download onto your computer that can execute arbitrary code. (In fact, yeah, the asset store itself could be dangerous, as it encourages people to download a package without first being able to inspect it. Again, I personally prefer pulling from a repo, which I can check out beforehand.)
The point is that a bad actor might be able to put themselves between your repository and the exact package version you're attempting to download, and give you something you did not expect. The checksum helps ensure that what you're getting was not tampered with, whether it by a man-in-the-middle, a hacker of the asset store, a hacker of the asset owner's account, or a malicious asset owner.
OP accepted the feedback, but they appeared to be.. let's say "more emotional" than others in this thread.
But hey, I appreciate you looking out for OP. They don't deserve to be piled on. I'm just trying to explain why I said what I said.
Everyone agree on this too and OP clearly mentionned checksums after you suggested a check and that's what should be implemented so that looks pretty fine too me. I like good endings :)