> It's really stupid simple to follow safe practices for absolute majority of apps. That’s what C programmers tell me about memory management and buffer sizing

> It's really stupid simple to follow safe practices for absolute majority of apps. That’s what C programmers tell me about memory management and buffer sizing. And yet: https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/microsoft-70-percent-of-all-security-bugs-are-memory-safety-issues/ https://www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/microsoft-70-percen... Thing is: even if you are careful, you only need to make a single mistake to lose everything. Just like there’s is benefit in memory-safe languages, there is benefit in environments where a single .innerHTML instead of a .innerText doesn’t mean an RCE. But that wasn’t really the point of my initial comment. Just as I can accept C programmers thinking they don’t make mistakes, I can accept you believing never making any mistakes either and thus I can even accept electron having a footgun mode. What I took issue with wasn’t the general availability of such a mode but the fact that this mode is a silently chosen default. Have people explicitly opt in or out of this safety feature. Don’t assume they want to shoot themselves in the foot by default. That was my concern and this is the pet I hope we can all agree about. That I personally also think that turning off context isolation should be impossible is another matter and not really part of this discussion and I’m even willing to accept that people could change my mind about that one. But having an unsafe default is craziness in my book.