Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
by emteycz on Thursday April 22, 2021 @10:19AM
(#26903043)
How could resilience be verified after asking for consent?
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
by PixyMisa on Thursday April 22, 2021 @08:26PM
(#26909718)
Tell someone upstream - in this case Greg KH - what you want to do and agree on a protocol. Inform him of each patch you submit. He's then the backstop against anything in the experiment actually causing harm.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
by kemotep on Thursday April 22, 2021 @12:03PM
(#26904320)
Same way an employer trains employees on phishing campaigns or an auditor or penetration tester tests resilience or compliance.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
by emteycz on Thursday April 22, 2021 @12:07PM
(#26904375)
Yes, employers often send out fake phishing e-mails to test resilience and organizational penetration testing is done on the field with unsuspecting people.
Re:“They introduce kernel bugs on purpose”
by iR5ugfXGAE on Thursday April 22, 2021 @03:28PM
(#26907070)
Ah. I never replied to the e-mails sent out by my employer about registering for a training in phishing detection. I just assumed those e-mails were phishing e-mails.
I assume that so many official emails from my employer are phishing.. it's a mess.
As an OSS maintainer (Node.js and a bunch of popular JS libs with millions of weekly downloads) - I feel how _tempting_ it is to trust people and assume good faith. Often since people took the time to contribute you want to be "on their side" and help them "make it".
Identifying and then standing up to bad-faith actors is extremely important and thankless work. Especially ones that apparently seem to think it's fine to experiment on humans without consent.
So thanks. Keep it up.