4 ms·
From the point of view of a lay person Microsoft was caught asleep at the wheel. It allowed high levels of privileged access to their customers' systems. Anti-
by surfingdino 2y ago
From the point of view of a lay person Microsoft was caught asleep at the wheel. It allowed high levels of privileged access to their customers' systems. Anti-malware software ought to be monitored and scrutinised by Microsoft's own security teams no matter that it was the customers who wanted to/were told to use CrowdStrike. But I guess they spend too much on silly fidget-widgets like OpenAI to have a budget to watch the bottom line.
- averageRoyalty 2y agoIf I design and sell a car and you electrocute yourself replacing a head unit cutting wires - despite warnings from me saying "I don't recommend replacing the head unit, it could be dangerous. I've provided you one with basic functionality" - can you reasonably argue that I should have made it harder to replace head units, or been out auditing third party head units on the market? Your argument is anti software freedom. My Windows computer (or any other OS I choose to put on) should be able to run whatever code I instruct it to. The flip side of that coin is that the consequences are mine from doing so.
- surfingdino 2y agoA car manufacturer cannot stop you from cutting the wires, an OS vendor can monitor what is going on with your computer in real time so they are more than capable of implementing a process for verification of third-party software.
- averageRoyalty 2y agoWith modems in modern cars, a car manufacturer could absolutely monitor wire resistence and "shut down" a wire remotely. Most people would agree however that's unnecessary and invasive.