3 ms·
The framing is absurd & fascist to the core. Someone was cyber attacking Chrome. Unclear if Google had even so much as a guess they knew who from. There were b
by jauntywundrkind 2y ago
The framing is absurd & fascist to the core.
Someone was cyber attacking Chrome. Unclear if Google had even so much as a guess they knew who from. There were bugs in Chrome. Google fixed the vulnerabilities, making the software obey the contract websites & users have with each other, & detailed why they were changing the open source code in such a fashion.
This is not burning an operation. Google didn't name any operation or country. Google probably didn't know who it even was!
If they had some guesses, & did try to pick up the phone & call say MI6, about this topic of leaving this exploit jeapordizing everyone running - which they may well have done (if they confidently track down the cyber attack) - the first most likely response is "we have no idea what you re talking about" in which case fixing the vulnerability & writing a blog post is basically the only remotely acceptible option. You spent a while trying to find out who the cyber attack is launching from, you've gone crazy far to do due diligence to track down whose attack it is, and they say it's not theirs. Ok your diligence was wrong, the cyber attack is coming from somewhere else or from multiple people, you need to resolve it.
Next option is whichever security agency either fesses up & does the right thing. Google addresses the vulnerabilities, and writes a blog post about them.
Or, stand-in Intelligence Agency [SIIA] declares, no, we're SIIA, and you're leaving the defect in place, because we say so.
It's unclear what the author is really protesting here? Bugs are critical to national security so we should let people exploit them? Oh that's exactly what they're saying.
> However, burning operations, no matter the actor and no matter the reason, demonstrates a grave misunderstanding of the critical role that cyber plays in reducing harm in the world.
'The military's active use of indiscriminate cyberwarfare trump's the right to find and correct defects.' Wow. That is a bold position.
- poincaredisk 2y agoI fully agree. Except I don't even think Google should "call" MI6 before publication. Nobody knows who else knew or used this vulnerability. Patching bugs is the right thing to do period. >Bugs are critical to national security so we should let people exploit them? Oh that's exactly what they're saying. The author is just a tiny step from saying that the government should have a right to exploit every device and decrypt every communication. It's a scary and authoritarian position, but sadly quite common for IT people working in law enforcement. From experience they are good people with good intentions, but we know what the road to hell is paved with.