4 ms·
> XYZ got hacked, bad IT sec at XYZ In this particular case I can't follow this part of the reasoning. It was a counterterrorism operation using sophisticated
by tgragnato 6y ago
> XYZ got hacked, bad IT sec at XYZ
In this particular case I can't follow this part of the reasoning.
It was a counterterrorism operation using sophisticated exploit chains.
Would you clarify what's the bad IT sec? "nobody should use a browser"?
https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-37hyk7hERGk/YFDuISGgCNI/AAAAAAAAaww/xcrVLfY_ZUQVozcte09NaqafWbL8ukvDgCNcBGAsYHQ/s1660/image1%2B%25282%2529.png https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-37hyk7hERGk/YFDuISGgCNI/AAAAAAAAa...
- eqvinox 6y agoI was trying to make an independent point with that "coincidentally ...", sorry if that was a bit unclear. In this case, the takeaway would be "we still don't know how to make secure browsers even though we're trying our darndest." But also, that exploit chain is limited to a single machine; there's still some opportunity to limit damages on a larger scale.
- iforgotpassword 6y agoThat's a bit extreme, but I find it worrying how the general public seems to have accepted that software just has bugs. Like it's this self conscious thing and nobody is at fault. Prisoners don't get released although they served their sentence? Software fault. People pay more tax thab they should? Software bug! Let's just shrug im confusion about that silly software problems that nobody os possibly responsible for.
- ben_w 6y agoMost people understand computers in the same way I “understand” law, the armed forces, and medicine: via Hollywood. This naturally leads to a chronic gap between the state of reality and belief about the state of reality.