Comments by "" (@dingokidneys) on "" video.

Not wise to trust anyone with a financial motive to truly act in your best interest and not their own. US companies can and do sell client data to data brokers who then on-sell it to whoever is happy to pay be that marketers, law enforcement, the US State or federal governments and even foreign (e.g. China) governments. Why go the trouble of putting a back door in consumer electronics sold to random people when you can just buy the data legitimately?
3
True but it is possible to analyse the behaviour of a piece of software. This is done with malware all the time. You see what it does to your system, what resources it uses, where it reaches out to on the local network or the internet. It may often be a breach of term and conditions of use but it is possible to literally reverse engineer what software is doing. I may or may not have done a bit of this myself back in the day. Personally, I trust FOSS way more than I trust anything from a proprietary software manufacturer. Still, it is possible to be reasonably sure that a piece of software isn't doing nefarious things. Interesting: proprietary software has manufacturers which free and open software has developers. I like the idea of developers - people who work on a project because they love it - more than manufacturers - faceless companies driven by the profit motive and marketing.
2
The great thing about software is that if you don't like what's on offer, you can easily build something you do like. Backup software can be as simple as a couple of well thought out scripts leveraging well known, reliable copying tools - like 'rsync'. With backups, the most important thing is that you get a valid copy that you can easily restore and that the copy is kept in a safe place. You don't need sophisticated software to do this, just a will to get it done. If what you use is so sophisticated that you don't understand it, I'd suggest that you are better off with a more low tech solution that you do understand.
1
@ Many CVE's turn up in open source software because it is open to scrutiny and freely admits its' errors rather than trying to push them under the carpet like Oracle is presently doing with a data breach that has been confirmed but that they will not admit to.
1
Some years ago when there was a bit kerfuffle over Huawei network equipment, Huawei submitted their source code to a full review in Europe. The biggest finding from that was just how poor their code was. No backdoors, no clever spying implants, just crappy code held together with hot glue and pipe cleaners.
1