51–60 of 151 posts
The security flaw isnt even the outrageous part. It was secretly installing webservers that dont even remove themselves when you uninstall the app that makes them scum.
do `lsof -i | grep LISTEN` to find out what server is running on your machine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it’s an argument for responsible disclosure - you tell them, give them plenty of time to fix it, and publish. But responsible disclosure absolutely does not mean “no disclosure”. It means give them a chance to fix it. If they choose not to you disclose so that people know that they need to take steps to protect themselves. The important thing is that the disclosure must become public. It doesn’t matter that they…
Responsible disclosure doesn’t mean anything. It’s an obsolete term. You’re referring to coordinated disclosure. https://blogs.technet.microsoft.com/ecostrat/2010/07/22/coor...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this is why anyone who trusts that organization in any way moving forward is a fool.
Nah leadership can change, see Microsoft and apple
Apple usually needs to be shamed into admitting to and repairing any broken hardware design. They had to be sued in multiple countries to stop misleading customers to buy AppleCare and allow them to use the warranty guaranteed by law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this is why anyone who trusts that organization in any way moving forward is a fool.
Nah leadership can change, see Microsoft and apple
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nah leadership can change, see Microsoft and apple
That’s more of a reason not to trust anything ever. If leaders change for the worse, your investment in the company gets screwed no matter how well they’d done previously. And that investment can be stocks or it can be data, to give an example which you can’t just pull.
RingCentral Meetings still vulnerable: lsof -i :19424 https://www.ringcentral.com/whyringcentral/company/pressrele...
For those unaware, RingCentral white-labels the zoom.us product as their meeting solution.
Tech executive changes stance after very public embarrassment that could impact their bottom line. If they didn't get the backlash, they would have kept their course. There's not really much "willing to accept responsibility" here as far as I'm concerned.
Exactly. My company is actively shopping for a conferencing tool, and Zoom just ensured that it's eliminated.
Glad to see the company is changing course, but I’m not sure it would have happened without the public shaming. I want companies to fix things because something is insecure and it endangers the public, not because they have their feet to the fire. I know companies don’t always respond right the first time, I know I haven’t, but Zoom had over 90 days to consider their responses and possible options / software changes.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anger is certainly justified, but it should give way to reconciliation once the offending party truly repents. Do we want a world of people who change their ways, even if for somewhat impure reasons, or a world in which no one ever does because it's pointless?
They haven’t repented yet, though. Read their response.
For many tasks (probably most and certainly for most people) the iOS model is the best.
It is, however way too restrictive for a number of use cases. Prohibitively so.
Imagine two very different and isolated environments. Terminal, compilers, file managers in one, most other software in the other. With perhaps shared folders between them.