[crasp]

> White House officials have deflected many questions, and responded to others by arguing that the focus should be on the attackers themselves, not the manufacturer of their weapons.

Am i to understand that if somebody would manage to steal nuclear warheads and launch them we don't hold the people who failed to protect them responsible?

[strictnein]

A nuclear weapon is a little different than a patched SMB exploit.

[milkytron]

I agree that's a bit of a stretch for a comparison. I think it would be closer to saying that the NSA found a key to a company's system, didn't inform the company, and then got the key stolen from them by criminals which then brought down the system.

Obviously that's extremely simplified, but all parties here are at fault. And all we're seeing is a bunch of finger pointing, with not enough defensive and preventative action being taken.

[d33]

How's that different in terms of responsibility?

[strictnein]

One kills millions.

[blitmap]

SMB attacks can be used against medical facilities. I would reframe this as "both can kill".

[pizza]

The principle should be the same.