3 ms·

You're skipping the part where the IRB would have to approve injecting vulnerabilities into a public software project, a process which involves obfuscating and

by zymhan 5y ago

You're skipping the part where the IRB would have to approve injecting vulnerabilities into a public software project, a process which involves obfuscating and lying to humans.

fluidcruft 5y ago
Right, but according to what's said about the study design, they (1) fixed an existing bug (2) introduced a new bug, and if maintainers didn't notice the new bug, (3) followed up with a patch removing the new bug Overall there's benefit in that an existing bug is removed and no introduced bugs persist. I don't see why IRB would be likely to object to this.