|
|
|
|
|
by rester324
335 days ago
|
|
I think this would be a fair assessment, if the security advisory would be true. Since it's most probably false, the implications you refer to remain hypothetical, while the cost of cleaning up after npm's decision are measured in real M$s. And I think that's the real issue here. I am not saying that we should give up on security altogether, but now there is so much toil attached to managing security, compliance and such aspects of the development lifecycle, that at some point managing all these aspects will outweigh all productivity a dev can bring to the project. It's admittedly a hyperbole, but at that point the whole development procedure would simply become a pointless exercise without any benefit to anyone. |
|
So the damage is already done, and real security problems will never be properly addressed. One must come to the conclusion that NPM has to be avoided at all cost if security is a concern at all. Additionally, one must make sure that when onboarding a developer coming from the NPM world into a sane project, they have to be properly de-conditioned with regards to security advisories.