Keeping a bug private doesn't mean that people don't know about it - especially folks who trade in 0Days - you could argue making it public just levels the playing field.
I have answered your question. You seem to be dodging mine by claiming I'm dodging yours, which seems really odd. If I find out a restaurant is serving tainted food, should I be required to keep quiet about it indefinitely while the company resolves it?
-
-
I think the restaurant/food analogy is bad, because software is far buggier than food, because there are strong regulations around food. None around software. I missed your answer on DNS/Spectre/Meltdown. What was it?
-
Wait, software is an unregulated wildwest so vendors must be trusted and protected from criticism? Shouldn't it be the opposite, we need more transparency and accountability because it's not as well regulated as other industries?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Fixing tainted food is easier than fixing an incredibly complex piece of software like an operating system. And no, you can't just throw more developers at a problem to fix it faster. Common rookie mistake to believe that, Tavis.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.