nonmo

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by nonmo 3y ago

   It's common knowledge. Literally no-one working in this field considers patching a buffer overrun or use-after-free or whatever to be the same as adding a security feature.
2. 2.▲
   by nonmo 3y ago

   Did you reply to the wrong comment? I didn't mention child abuse.
3. 3.▲
   by nonmo 3y ago

   Patching an 0-day isn't the same thing as adding a new privacy or security feature. Linux is different because anyone can very clearly see the roadmap for features by following the LKML.
4. 4.▲
   by nonmo 3y ago

   > Force technology companies to inform the Home Office in advance of security and privacy features they want to add, including encryption, and force them to disable features which the government objects to This sounds fine to me. The sig
5. 5.▲
   by nonmo 3y ago

   I think it's really unfortunate that the ID card legislation didn't go through. Standardising this would have made so many things much easier, especially interacting with government services. Instead we have this convoluted ad-hoc