4 ms·
This site regularly upvotes posts on X (nee Twitter) and Medium and other sites that actively nag me. It would take me less than 6 minutes to register a domain
by k8svet 3y ago
This site regularly upvotes posts on X (nee Twitter) and Medium and other sites that actively nag me. It would take me less than 6 minutes to register a domain on njalla, pay in crypto, add the DNS to cloudflare, and upload some static files to a GitHub repo. And no nagware! Even if it is self promotion, I couldn't be bothered to whine about this when I'm inundated with far more bullshit from far more prominent, frequent actors on a daily basis.
- wutwutwat 3y agoI don't get bothered by people doing it because they are able to, or care how long it takes them to spin it up, good for them. The thing that bothers me is that disclosing sec vulnerabilities isn't a popularity contest, and as you can see from other comments here, people are gauging the severity of the vulnerability based on if it has a fucking marketing website or not. That's not a good pattern to keep enforcing imo
- k8svet 3y agoIf people are actually judging the importance of a vuln based on "it has a domain" then my issue would be with them. People have all sorts of miscalibrated heuristics with which they judge things. Regardless of the originators intentions.
- wutwutwat 3y agoTreat the problem not the symptoms. People can't use the marketing site to gauge severity if they don't exist.
- ziddoap 3y agoWhy is your question not directed at the people that bother you, if that is the case? Seems rather unproductive to question why the site exists when your problem is with people using the existence of the site to make decisions.
- wutwutwat 3y agoMy problem is with the sites existing, which is what my original comment is asking about. The people using them to guage severity is a symptom of the problem of these sites being a thing, and is naturally going to happen in a world like this. If the website marketing doesn't exist, the people using them to gauge severity won't be able to do so. Treat the problem not the symptoms.
- ziddoap 3y agoIf I had a website that posted a sci-fi story and people misinterpret the story as being real and factual, should I take my website down or should people refresh themselves on how to differentiate sci-fi from reality? I would argue that the people who think the existence of a website is a good gauge for vulnerability severity need to have a refresher on how to gauge vulnerability severity. The inability/lack of education in how to assess severity is the root of the problem in my opinion.
- wutwutwat 3y agoI have no idea how to go about responding to your hypothetical question, people reading fiction and thinking it's real doesn't compare to people being conditioned to not care about sec vulns unless it has a dedicated website with pretty logos. War of the Worlds was broadcast and people freaked out that aliens were invading. I don't think they tracked each of those people down and told them to not be so stupid, they started adding disclaimers to the broadcasts so people coming in late or whenever they would know it was a story and fiction. They fixed the problem not the symptoms.
- ziddoap 3y agoAgree to disagree, I guess.
- crimsontech 3y agoEverything seems to be a popularity contest now. I’ve seen people with the job title “Cyber Influencer”. It could just be that the researcher is immensely proud of their work and wants to show it off with its own website, logo, clever name, etc.
- wutwutwat 3y agoThey should be proud, and I'm not bothered by that one bit, the work they did is a great thing. This website existing or not should have no bearing over the good work they did or them being proud of the work they did.
- Domenic_S 3y ago> domain on njalla, pay in crypto, add the DNS to cloudflare one of these things is not like the other