5 ms·
Good question, though I can imagine they took this action for two reasons: 1. They don't have the ability to freeze repos (i.e. would require some engineering
by junon 3y ago
Good question, though I can imagine they took this action for two reasons:
1. They don't have the ability to freeze repos (i.e. would require some engineering effort to implement it), as I've never seen them do that before.
2. Many distros (and I assume many enterprises) were still linking to the GitHub releases to source the infected tarballs for building. Disabling the repo prevents that.
The infected tarballs and repo are still available elsewhere for researchers to find, too.
- nihilanth 3y agoThey could always archive it. Theoretically (and I mean theoretically only), there's another reason for Microsoft to prevent access to repo: if a nation state was involved, and there've been backdoor conversations to obfuscate the trail.