The article contains a rehashing of the xz attack, but also contains a discussion of for-profit open source/source available software. The argument in the arti

The article contains a rehashing of the xz attack, but also contains a discussion of for-profit open source/source available software. The argument in the article, that there are greater threats to FOSS than security vulnerabilities, is reasonable. I'd add that some large software companies have an incentive to make security vulnerabilities seem as scary as possible, because it makes them seem like they are doing important work. Seems like a viable approach to lobbying for laws that could lead to excess regulatory capture.