3 ms·
Would you like a nuclear powerplant to be ran with this kind of approach to safety? Given the amount of possible targets and how unreliable people can be at ass
by frostburg 8y ago
Would you like a nuclear powerplant to be ran with this kind of approach to safety? Given the amount of possible targets and how unreliable people can be at assessing what risk they're exposed to, having mitigation active by default is obviously the only sane answer.
- NewsAware 8y agoSomehow I doubt nuclear power plants run (unmodified) Linux kernels released in the last 5 years
- CamperBob2 8y agoPsst, every machine on the Internet must now be hardened to conform to nuclear and aerospace industry standards. So sayeth the Priesthood of Infosec. Haven't you heard?
- frostburg 8y agoThat's probably not enough.
- 64738 8y agoExactly... they're running on XP so it's all good
- rleigh 8y agoWhen I went to Sellafield they had Win3.1 on the fuel rod chopping machine in the reprocessing plant (admittedly in '97!)
- CamperBob2 8y agoSorry, but that's my call, not yours. My computer is not a nuclear power plant.
- city41 8y agoThe Linux team also needs to make a call on the kernel they maintain. You can always choose to stick with an older kernel or even patch out the fixes if you like.
- CamperBob2 8y agoYeah, that scales really well. The answer to every overreaction and questionable policy is always, "Just rebuild your kernel."
- detaro 8y agoAre there any of those changes you can't disable for your computer? I thought all(?) of them were behind flags, since different hardware needs different sets.