Microsoft acquires Github

Post by drspacemonkey » Mon, Jun 04, 2018, 10:23 PM UTC

trgv wrote: post #599

sanbor wrote: post #422

This is a wake up call. Too many things are relying on Github right now. Microsoft was part of the PRISM program. If Microsoft shares SSL certs with NSA they could do MITM attacks. What if in some very specific cases you download dependencies from GitHub and they give you a different version with malicious code? It's the NSA. They could be smart enough to only deploy those attacks on production servers were nobody is…

Whenever I read these kinds of posts on this website I think of Sterling Hayden in Dr. Strangelove. (The crazy SAC commander who thinks the Russians are plotting to steal Americans' precious bodily fluids). I understand that people don't trust the NSA/US government. And they shouldn't: the US government will always put its interests above yours and mine, and above those of allied countries. At the same time, this stu…

Post by merinowool » Mon, Jun 04, 2018, 10:39 PM UTC

Fnoord wrote: post #771

merinowool wrote: post #758

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fact is Microsoft is a hostile company and will have access to private repositories.

Fact? How do you define whether Microsoft is hostile? What are your criteria? Look, I hated Microsoft in the '90s and '00s. I was there. I grew up in a world where IBM dominated the market though. They've both changed. The market has changed and both of these companies had to deal with that. The reality is that nowadays people pay with their privacy instead of with currency for a product; they are the product. Does i…

Post by badminton1 » Mon, Jun 04, 2018, 10:56 PM UTC

cdelsolar wrote: post #746

amelius wrote: post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the NSA felt like spying on you, pro tip, they're gonna be able to do it. True, but I suppose it matters how easy/difficult it is for them to do that.

The NSA is not god, they can't break 2048-bit TLS encryption no matter how many computers they have.

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Jun 04, 2018, 11:25 PM UTC

Aldo_MX wrote: post #766

pavlov wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why were you not concerned previously about an unprofitable SV startup holding that central position? GitHub wasn’t a non-profit. This was always the endgame for them. They were losing money to acquire a userbase that would be sold when the time is right — just like WhatsApp and numerous other big social SV plays.

What is SV? There are too many definitions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SV

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jun 05, 2018, 12:09 AM UTC

rckclmbr wrote: post #708

xaiki wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well hello there, I'd like to share a story with you. I'm the maintainer of butterproject.org and have been maintaining popcorntime.io for a while, we had there 2 issues with GitHub a few years ago, both related to (unfounded) copyright claims on the butter and popcorntime code (we absolutely own the right to every single line there), when we tried to make our case we were ignored once and asked to 'keep things quiet…

popcorntime was strictly confrontational, and was blatantly illegal. "Transforming BitTorrent media streaming" can be a good goal, but doing it illegally will cause you to be shut down. Remember grooveshark? They tried the same thing -- to create a legit service that disrupts and industry. But there's a reason they failed and spotify succeeded, and I think it's because they partnered with existing companies instead o…