You know you’re getting into zealot territory when people are arguing semantics over the headline pointing to a zero authentication admin access vulnerability CVE that affects a double-digit percentage of users.

▲

earnesti 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Does it really? Digging up the data from example the 135k instances in the open reeks like bullshit, I would suspect several other claims are exaggerated as well.

▲

DrewADesign 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> Digging up the data from example the 135k instances in the open reeks like bullshit, I would suspect several other claims are exaggerated as well.

Do you so stringently examine most CVEs? I’ll bet you don’t. Are you a big fan of this project? I’ll bet you are. Do you have any actual data to counter what they said or do you just sort of generally not vibe with it? If so, now would be a great time to break it out while this is still fresh. If not…

▲

nickthegreek 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They are pointing out the data provided does not appear to be real. There is no credible link to this 135k number. They do not need to provide a number, as one does not appear to exist.

	▲	DrewADesign 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Well the post was removed so that’s not very promising on their part.