3 ms·
So much trouble over creating, funding, and arming “freedom fighters”/“moderate rebels” to (unsuccessfully) take down Assad. I think I concur with Google TAG he
by ein0p 2y ago
So much trouble over creating, funding, and arming “freedom fighters”/“moderate rebels” to (unsuccessfully) take down Assad. I think I concur with Google TAG here. I think exposing and fixing zero days is better than not doing so, simply because other countries can find them also. Which this article openly acknowledges thus defeating its own argument
- hi-v-rocknroll 2y agoYep. 'sploit sellers from original researchers to marketplaces inherently trade greed for the public good, and so are less ethically constrained from not also selling into BRICS/nonaligned markets as well to double or triple their money. It's dirty shit.
- notactuallyben 2y agoAre you suggesting that western exploit sellers are selling bugs to western governments and also BRICS? that sounds not very likely. All of this stuff is very complicated ethically, but I don't think you can simply say that it is always in the public good to expose bugs (stuxnet is a good example of a bug chain avoiding a far deadlier outcome).. I've personally worked for vendors of software and done offensive research, and now I do neither.
- ein0p 2y agoGP is suggesting that not all exploit researchers are “western” or western aligned. Some of them are even nation state funded, and they’re often quite good.
- notactuallyben 2y agoYep, I don't think there's any disagreement with that, especially when you look at things like Tianfu cup in general. Any country that can, essentially wants to do offensive cyber.