4 ms·
That would also be the perfect way to avoid disclosing the vulnerability so they could keep using it. Not saying that’s what is happening here, but it’s not li
by save_ferris 6y ago
That would also be the perfect way to avoid disclosing the vulnerability so they could keep using it.
Not saying that’s what is happening here, but it’s not like Facebook has a glowing reputation to begin with. Telling the vendor that a future release will patch the bug gets everyone to stop asking questions without really knowing if it’s true.
- vinceguidry 6y agoIf you have need for Tails and you continue to use old versions of it out of laziness, then you really are just begging to be pwned. We're not talking about consumer-grade Ubuntu here.
- sfj 6y agoI think the parent is saying that Facebook could have been lying about the exploit being patched away, in order to keep the exploit available and have an excuse as to why they didn't reveal how they did it.
- save_ferris 6y agoI think you misunderstand me. By telling Tails that the vulnerability will be patched in a future release without disclosing the details of the vulnerability, Tails has no way of knowing if this is actually true. It’s easy to be a little skeptical when a company spends 6 figures to develop an exploit and then state publicly “we can verify that the issue will be patched in a future Tails release, but we’re not going to tell them or anyone else what the exploit was in the first place.” If you wanted to keep using that exploit, or sell it, the easiest way to do so would be to tell Tails that it’s going to be fixed without actually giving them any details about it.