31–40 of 127 posts
The real kicker is in point 1.13: > website activity logs show the earliest request on the server for the URL https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/OBR_Economic_and_fiscal_outl... . This request was unsuccessful, as the document had not been uploaded yet. Between this time and 11:30, a total of 44 unsuccessful requests to this URL were made from seven unique IP addresses. In other words, someone was guessing the correct st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the popular press it’s been sidelined because it would distract from the continuous attacks on the chancellor
Yes, it’s getting quite ridiculous now. Labour, for sure, have not done themselves any favours in their first 18 months in charge, but the level of attack and vitriol is exceptional and beyond any reasonable level. It makes me wonder what exactly is driving this.
Or is the significance of this news based on the advantages that players on the market who caught hold of it early will have? Is it only important to civilians relative to their ability to question who may be benefitting from the 40 minute head start that these players might have gained or (for the conspiracy-minded) been handed through nefarious means?
[1]: Which would lead me to ask why would it belong on a platform typically intended for publishing things in public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The main issue is that there isn't any governance to the plugin store. Once you have a plugin in there, you have free reign to do whatever you want with it. Getting it in there is a PITA though. For example, a library author and I created a plugin, but they wouldn't let me submit it because I wasn't the other author, and they wouldn't let him submit it because he wasn't me. True story.
TBF there is some scrutiny on existing plugins, the team is just extremely understaffed (it’s ran by volunteers after all). I got involved in a plugin that ended up getting de-listed for some minor ToS violations after several years of being “fine”, they re-reviewed the plugin with the same rigor as a new submission.
Why are government organisations which handle sensitive information using Wordpress?
Vs. if you just let Will and Pete do it in WordPress (or on Facebook, or such) then needed tasks might actually be accomplished.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the popular press it’s been sidelined because it would distract from the continuous attacks on the chancellor
Yes, it’s getting quite ridiculous now. Labour, for sure, have not done themselves any favours in their first 18 months in charge, but the level of attack and vitriol is exceptional and beyond any reasonable level. It makes me wonder what exactly is driving this.
In this case this is an extremely unpopular government to start with that increases taxes across the board while handing out more benefits and claiming that they had no choice because of the state of the public finances, and we learn that they possibly misled the public on that latter point. So, yes, in politics and especially British politics this means a riot against the Chancellor (who was also caught recently having let her house without the required legal licence, btw, after the [now former] Deputy PM was caught dodging taxes on the purchase of a second home...) because everyone "smells blood" but that's the game and it's not completely undeserved, either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the popular press it’s been sidelined because it would distract from the continuous attacks on the chancellor
Yes, it’s getting quite ridiculous now. Labour, for sure, have not done themselves any favours in their first 18 months in charge, but the level of attack and vitriol is exceptional and beyond any reasonable level. It makes me wonder what exactly is driving this.
I appreciate things time but so far the government have enormously walked back their planning reform proposals, which was one of their few pro-growth policies, and haven't really made any dent in anything else substantive. It's been pretty clear since even before the election that they didn't really have a plan, and they got a fairly light scrutiny through the campaign because the Tories were so appalling. Then since they got in they're just scrambling around looking fairly incompetent and the dearth of talent on the cabinet has been pretty plain to see as well. Largely I want Labour to succeed but they're not making it easy to like them.
There's a couple of passing mentions of Download Monitor, but also the timeline strongly implies that a specific source was simply guessing the URL of the PDF long before it was uploaded I'm not clear from the doc which of these scenarios is what they're calling the "leak"
> but also the timeline strongly implies that a specific source was simply guessing the URL of the PDF long before it was uploaded A bunch of people were scraping commonly used urls based on previous OBR reports, in order to report as soon as it was live, as it common with all things of this kind The mistake was that the URL should have been obfuscated, and only changed to the "clear" URL at publish time, but a plugi…
We don't actually know that, it's just that the report did hit Reuters pretty swiftly.
The real kicker is in point 1.13: > website activity logs show the earliest request on the server for the URL https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/OBR_Economic_and_fiscal_outl... . This request was unsuccessful, as the document had not been uploaded yet. Between this time and 11:30, a total of 44 unsuccessful requests to this URL were made from seven unique IP addresses. In other words, someone was guessing the correct st…
The URLS are predictable. Hedge-funds would want to get the file as soon as it would be available - I imagine someone set up a cron-job to try the URL every few minutes.