|
|
|
|
|
|
by pjmlp
1289 days ago
|
|
|
Yes it definetly should. Computing is the only industry, where people accept to live with tainted goods instead of forcing whoever sold them to pay back, cover for their damage or whatever. We already have high integrity computing, digital stores with returns, consulting with warranty clauses, and some countries are finally waking up that computing shouldn't be a special snowflake. https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2021/germany/the-german... |
|
|
I agree if there's a high social cost to a breach then the government should punish those involved. Also, the security of your software depends on your threat model and which threats are in scope and you're willing to invest in protecting against. The tradeoff is ease of development and velocity. So maybe such laws will incentive this process differently, and maybe it's a worthwhile change.
I look at computing as a big experiment. Personally, I am very careful to use trustworthy services and don't depend on software for anything critical (besides banking, but luckily FDIC). Most people don't take the same precautions and rely very heavily. It's obviously critical infrastructure at this point. Maybe it's time to stop thinking of it as an experiment, and maybe these laws make sense.
I don't like the concept for emotional reasons; to me it's sad and signals another step towards the end of the golden age of the internet.