4 ms·
This is probably intended as damage control, but I think this response will do Symantec more bad than good. No problem description, no explanation of consequenc
by orless 10y ago
This is probably intended as damage control, but I think this response will do Symantec more bad than good. No problem description, no explanation of consequences for customers, no acknowledgment of the failure no action plan, no schedule, no options, nothing. As a reader if I'm already aware of the problem, this response provided zero substance to counter Google. If I'm unaware then I'm welcome to google what it's all about, land on the blink-dev post, emotionless and factual. The whole issue is about trust, but so far Symantec does not seem to act responsibly which does not help to re-establish trust.
I also wonder what the exact consequences will be (Symantec post fails to explain this). I mean, which big sites will be hit? When? For how many users?
- orless 10y agoA much more interesting document is "Symantec Second Response to Mis-Issuance Questions – February 12, 2017": https://bug1334377.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=8836487 https://bug1334377.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=8836...