First, feature requests are prioritized in a very very fuzzy process. Popularity is important (as shown by demonstrated interest by users here on the forum). So is ease of implementation. So are a dozen or so other factors. The devs look at the forum, and so do us mods, in order to find interesting and valuable FRs. It is not a methodological process. Now, please keep on topic.
In terms of security reviewing: if you handle sensitive data in Obsidian and you do not have the skillset to review what a plugin is doing, consider either hiring someone to audit the code for you or not using the plugin.
As has already been discussed, it is impossible to offer a security guarantee on just one plugin, let alone at scale. More than a plugin a day has been published since Obsidian’s API was launched. Many of those plugins have been updated dozens of times. Reviewing each of those plugins and updates takes hours. The initial review is a quality review. It does not mean the plugin has been guaranteed to be safe and secure. It’s a cursory analysis to check for anything obvious, and to provide feedback to the plugin developers about how they might improve the plugin design/engineering.
Let me restate: it is impossible to offer a security guarantee on plugins. Please please stop beating this poor horse. What we have instead is a social system in which other users and developers are highly likely to notice and report nefarious behavior. But, if you are dealing with sensitive data, it is best to audit the code of plugins you’re using yourself, hire someone to audit for you, or not to use third-party plugins.
I encourage future contributions to this thread to advance the conversation beyond this focus. E.g., by…
- suggesting ways of checking plugin security on the user side; or
- suggesting and discussing models of resourcing so that a more robust reviewing mechanism could be offered.