2 ms·
Yes, so Microsoft has to make the decision for them. I'm not sure "we're going to make your computer 30% slower because there's a 0.0001% chance someone could s
by Wowfunhappy 5y ago
Yes, so Microsoft has to make the decision for them. I'm not sure "we're going to make your computer 30% slower because there's a 0.0001% chance someone could steal your password" is the right decision.
(These numbers are completely made up. Any decision would depend on getting the right numbers, but this appears to be easier said than done. I've seen very different estimates.)
- freeone3000 5y agoAn unpatched data exfil against the OS with the largest install base in the world? It doesn't matter it's a byte at a time, cryptominers have done more with less. The question isn't if, the question is who and how many. The fallout from SMB2 is still ongoing, and it was patched 10 years ago. The idea of not patching EVER opens up harms for the next twenty years for everyone.
- cookiengineer 5y ago> The fallout from SMB2 This made me wanna cry. Jokes aside, there's much truth to this. Attack vectors at this scale are seriously dangerous. I'm still hoping we can prevent the namewreck fallout of SCADA systems, because at one point or another, 8200 is gonna make a mistake with their offensive cybersec operations.
- michaelmrose 5y agoWhat is the chance that this user has unbacked up data that someone could extort them for $500. Multiply this chance by the proportion who would enable a "go faster" option and then by 1.5 billion computers. Let us say 20% and 25% * 1.5B. Maybe 75M targets give or take depending on how you want to do the math.