Hacker News Reader

Comment by boxed | Hacker News Reader

It's funny. When Apple goes in and changes peoples systems deeply without consent then it's Apple being evil. When they don't, it's Apple being evil. Heads I win, tails you lose.

View on HN

Let's pretend there's a night and day difference between pushing some MP3 onto all iPhones and distrusting a chain of certs that hold the value of '4'. At minimum Apple need to revoke everywhere these joke-level certs live and as fast as possible, and on all devices which also means out of support. Breaking is acceptable here as CA trust is fully compromised.

Yes, there would be crowds of angry people, furious that Apple... released a critical security patch? Framing removing compromised certs as "changing peoples systems deeply" seems intentionally in bad faith.

It's funny, when I do steal something I get called bad, and when I do nothing and turn the blind eye to others stealing, I get called bad too.

Morality doesn't solely depend on action or inaction, it also matter what you act or don't act to.

I've seen this referred to as the "All Roads Lead to Rome" fallacy.

Eh? Changes systems without consent? Is that the ONLY way to update a fatal flaw in system? Normal update channels don't work?

Besides, how does this relate to my Linux point, where no one installs anything without you knowing it?

Because in the linux situation, you wouldn't get such an update automatically anyway so it'd be worse?

How would it be worse? Linux distros patched things almost immediately and you'd get a notification, typically after a daily check.

How is that worse than NOT having any sort of fix from Apple?

I don’t think you understand what consent means.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com