Conversation

Hey internet, Here is my statement on the event-stream issue: gist.github.com/dominictarr/9f Thanks to everyone who sent me friendly emoji ;) I'm okay. But this is really a much bigger issue (the viability of open source). I'm glad that this incidence is raising awareness!
42
1,403
Replying to
It's incredible to me the amount of baseless praise you're getting for putting so many people at risk of getting pwnd. Of course, much of it is to be expected for Twitter. You messed up, and you should realize you messed up and apologize. Simple as. Nothing praise worthy here.
3
1
Replying to
It does not need to be maintained. You could mark it as unmaintained and leave it as-is. If someone wanted to maintain it they can fork it and put it up on NPM themselves. No need to give away NPM publish rights on your package. How do you not understand this?
2
Replying to and
So what happens if an abandoned, widely used project has a serious security vulnerability and there's no maintainer to address it? I think the bar should have been higher for transferring control to someone else but the attacker seems determined enough to pass the usual vetting.
1
Replying to and
It does appear a significant portion of the npm community applies a much lower bar than I'm used to for giving out commit access or turning over maintainership. However, the usual criteria is just that people contributed useful changes for a while and appear decent and competent.
1
Replying to and
I don't think the vast majority of community projects have much resistance to a determined attacker willing to bide their time and actually do useful work leading up to planting a backdoor. They could do that with multiple projects waiting to make their move when they gain trust.
1
Show replies