> The Guardian are not the 'bad guys' for trying to inform us of a vulnerability. This is my ultimate takeaway as well; their intent was good, it was their imp

> The Guardian are not the 'bad guys' for trying to inform us of a vulnerability. This is my ultimate takeaway as well; their intent was good, it was their implementation that fell short. I'm just really bothered that they are unwilling to own their mistake and retract the article, or at the very least allow a counter-editorial to be written and published by them.