|
| ▲ | __MatrixMan__ a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes. We're giving the user the ability to protect themselves from the vendor. Your logic only makes sense if the user is your enemy. |
| |
| ▲ | mitxela a day ago | parent [-] | | I am the vendor and the user is my enemy. Fortunately I get to decide his capabilities and not the other way around, so I win. | | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The device is in the user's possession, so you'll lose eventually, it's just a matter of how long it takes. | |
| ▲ | esseph a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oops, claude just cracked your system! |
|
|
|
| ▲ | andix a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You can even install your own certs into the golden cage (also known as iPhones). |
|
| ▲ | tempfile a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Which is better - two attack vectors that can be mitigated by an expert, or one attack vector that can't be mitigated by anyone? |
|
| ▲ | LtWorf a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Users aren't supposed to be considered an attack vector. I don't care what the advertisers think. |
| |
| ▲ | axus a day ago | parent | next [-] | | The infected devices on the LAN are an attack vector, though. | | |
| ▲ | mapontosevenths a day ago | parent [-] | | If I want my IOT garbage to be infected that's between me and my local botherder. The vendor loses the right to decide how my things are used the minute they take my money. | | |
| ▲ | mitxela a day ago | parent [-] | | Not in the EU. If devices you made get hacked in the EU and you have a business presence there, you're liable for the resulting damages under the Cyber Resiliency Act. If you don't notify the authorities promptly upon discovery, you might also be criminally liable. | | |
| ▲ | esseph a day ago | parent [-] | | What if your company doesn't exist anymore, and you have checks billions of devices out there that won't be getting firmware updates? | | |
| ▲ | mitxela 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not sure. You're probably out of luck in that case if someone can't prove that your out of business was a manipulative attempt to avoid liability. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | antonvs a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Users are attack vectors in one of the more commonly successful attacks: social engineering. | | |
| ▲ | gus_massa a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Like: To verify you are human, clik on the two ducks and install this new certificate. Bonus points if it's during a fake job interview. | | |
| ▲ | mitxela a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I did a job interview in a VM once and my legitimate accounts on some platforms got banned for using them in a VM. So you can't even protect yourself. | | |
| ▲ | no-name-here a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > my legitimate accounts on some platforms got banned for using them in a VM Which legitimate accounts get banned for use in a VM? That seems like an incredibly important thing I should know as I use legitimate accounts in VMs. | |
| ▲ | Y_Y a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Bullshit. How would a website even detect a VM? | | |
| |
| ▲ | antonvs a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Absolutely. "To access our secure site, install this certificate as follows..." |
| |
| ▲ | ruszki a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, however, this causes people who know what they do suffer because of people who don't. My question is whether this affects innovation, because the same thing at different places definitely does, and we actively fight against this exactly to help innovation. | |
| ▲ | LtWorf a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Right. Let's no longer sell computers then. |
|
|
