telebub

Are you replying to something else? I don't see the connection to a problem affecting a small number of websites or the suggestion of reporting them all to a browser maker to indirectly inform them.

You are confusing the wants of a manufacturer with a system that is being used by a person. The person owns the system that is either correct or incorrect for their needs and the manufacturer takes money and screws off. Or, you have the "soup Nazi" as proposed with the manufacturer makes sure you use the system as they imagined and not with a database setup beyond their control.

I find this whole removal idea a bit lazy. In theory some logic possibly declares some aspects of the BOM/DOM must be JS for introspection reasons, etc, but the reverse can't really be true.. There's nothing that can declare things like XSLT must be more native than a little trick with a otherwise standard JS VM, so the unique security edges of delegating things to a second class backwards support level could be quite small.

A family of eight who buys a (classic) Porsche bought an incorrect car unless it is for an expensive gag like putting sugar in the gas tank then an EV would be incorrect, no?

This is not an intermediate; they presumably block the 8 bad intermediates already (there's the vulnerability website to confirm that) while blocking other intermediates that are not known to have any problem is more disruptive to (ex-)customers of eMudhra the shorter the grace period.

Here the user was the deployer and presumably owner of the deployment. An overall setup is only correct if they and the software define a setup that happens to be correct. The software is incorrect if it doesn't support the incorrect setup they require.

I'm not in perishable food so what do I know.. But organization wide food safety measurements are probably more important than the average process BS.. Performing a full heat cycling of a freezer while no one is present to confirm the correct device OTOH sounds idiotic.

We need only ask that these weak sciences also progress one funeral at a time to fix everything by canceling 18% of the economy.

Dual or quad core is not that unusual even in very cheap SoCs, but this particular CVE needs a kernel line from this decade. Thousands of other CVEs indeed..

I cant really refute what you don't explain.

Just going from what Binance PR must believe about a laptop it seems unlikely to me that they've been tested in much depth by anyone with mafia tactics.

I think your expectations are too high. The vast majority of criminals don't bother checking targets where there's not good evidence its easy or something has worked before.

That's quite an approach, thanks for sharing. I still don't think it mitigates restoring within the US since they claim to have search rights within 100 miles of any international airport. Personally, I try not to fall into the trap of believing I need retention of data that doesn't fall into a few categories, most of which I would assume I will already be sharing with authorities through taxes, etc.

Great application of cross continental research by Blomberg. A typical Nigerian family of 3 (already atypical) is probably not spending one parents entire salary on electricity.

Isn't this just giving in if your only reasonable backup location is a US cloud that regularly has to negotiate with the US federal government. The only difference I see is that they have to resort to parallel construction.

Unwrapped extraction is the kind of thing security by checkbox covers and process review might catch so it is never clear in a case like this that some party with the capability to influence the process didn't want keys intentionally weak to emulate unwrap.. Then someone else may have introduced the swap of keys that would never have been seen with keys that would (be forever) in a public scrutiny DB.