We developers are in a unique position when it comes to the ability to not only be skeptical about the capabilities provided by open source software, but to actively analyze the code since it is freely available. In fact, one may even argue that open source software developers have a social responsibility to do so to contribute to the community.
But at what point do you as a developer say, "I better take a look at what this is doing before I trust using it" for any given thing? Is it a matter of trusting code with your personal information? Does it depend on the source you're getting it from?
What spurred this question on was a post on Hacker News to a javascript bookmarklet that supposedly tells you how "exposed" your information on Facebook is as well as recommending some fixes. I thought for a second "I'd rather not start blindly running this code over all my (fairly locked down) Facebook information so let me check it out".
The bookmarklet is simple enough, but it calls another javascript function which at the time (but not anymore) was highly compressed and undecipherable. That's when I said "nope, not gonna do it". So even though I could have verified the original uncompressed javascript from the Github site and even saved a local copy to verify and then run without hitting their server, I wasn't going to. It's several thousand lines and I'm not a total javascript guru to begin with.
Yet, folks are using it anyway. Even (supposedly) bright developers. What makes them trust the script? Did they all scrutinize it line by line? Do they know the guy personally and trust him not to do anything bad? Do they just take his word?
What makes you trust that a piece of open source software is not malicious?
