News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GitHub censored my research data by jcoffland on Saturday October 15, 2016 @02:57AM (#12713044)
What about the consumers who are being put at risk of being defrauded? Do they not have a right to protection? Malware infected ecommerce sites could be stealing credit card info and robbing consumers. Merchants who endanger consumers by failing to provide a secure platform for digital transactions do not have any right to be protected from having their negligence exposed.
Re:GitHub censored my research data by chappi42 on Saturday October 15, 2016 @03:17AM (#12713079)
A 'normal consumer' won't be helped by such a technical list on github/gitlab. Do you really believe they would look there? If they wanted protection they could have installed Ad-blockers etc. long time ago already. (Or use more reputable shops)
Re:GitHub censored my research data by jopsen on Saturday October 15, 2016 @03:55AM (#12713165)
Lots of people google the name of a webshop to check if it's legit.

Not all, but some non-tech people do that.. And lots of webshop owners google their own shop. Shaming sites that are hosting malware seems perfectly reasonable.

On topic: I assume github/gitlab both completely misunderstood what is going on, and thought this was a disclosure of security holes that could be exploited. I wouldn't be surprised if they do a lot of these.

Perhaps try to throw it up on a few different CDNs where you pay for the service and can contact support. Like S3 or dreamhost (they have decent support too). Arguably github/gitlab isn't the best hosting platform for misunderstood journalists.

Re:GitHub censored my research data by weaksauce on Saturday October 15, 2016 @12:53PM (#12714670)
How long is the author going to check and update that list of compromised websites? Right now they are broken but in 6 months when the site gets upgraded it will be a knock against them unless the author updates the list. This is the real problem.
Re:GitHub censored my research data by jamespo on Saturday October 15, 2016 @02:17PM (#12715050)
Not many do and they're even less likely to be on the first page of google hits.
Re:GitHub censored my research data by RubyPinch on Saturday October 15, 2016 @03:21AM (#12713090)
a lot of non-normal consumers can end up making a lot of noise, sometimes its enough to cause change to happen

as was noted, 600 sites have already cleaned up their act

> Update Oct 14: 631 stores have been fixed, good work everybody!

So is it really as useless as you claim?

Re:GitHub censored my research data by chappi42 on Saturday October 15, 2016 @04:27AM (#12713231)
It's really maybe not so useless as I thought. I forgot that such a list may show up on the first page when doing a google search for a (new) shop.

The 631 stores have likely been fixed b/c of the publicity (thanks to kicking the list out;)

I think I just don't like when this shame & name business happens on github/gitlab servers. Somewhere else, it's fine.

Re:GitHub censored my research data by goodplay on Saturday October 15, 2016 @03:24AM (#12713095)
You're saying that because normal consumers wont be helped by a "technical" list on github/gitlab, we shouldn't bother?

What about "technical" users?