5 ms·
>If it comes to that you'll hear about it on HN first. If folks start to explot it you'll hear about it. This is a pretty laissez-faire attitude with regards t
by ziddoap 5y ago
>If it comes to that you'll hear about it on HN first. If folks start to explot it you'll hear about it.
This is a pretty laissez-faire attitude with regards to security-critical exploits. You might be the one of the first ones affected. After all, someone has to be first one before they can post it on HN.
In a more general sense, it's a bad idea to rely on someone else as your primary alert. Whether it is a HN post, news article, whatever.
(I know that you aren't quite saying to use it as a primary alert, but a cursory read of your comment implies it, so it's worth discussing.)
- scandinavian 5y ago> You might be the one of the first ones affected If you are regularly the fist target of zero-days your threat model should be stricter yes. The other 7.9 billion people in the world can afford to be a little less strict.
- ziddoap 5y agoI didn't consider "don't wait for someone else to get hacked and tell you about it" to be a particularly strict method of security, but sure, I guess so.