Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by dboreham 38 days ago
I think it's more the cost to find a vulnerability that has significantly reduced, not the possibility that the vulnerability could have been found. But that cost mattered tremendously because someone has to fund the effort to find the bugs. This economics also applies to attackers.
1 comments

Is Firefox less invested in this than Curl? I mean there must be some explanation for this.
It's in the first sentence of your quote:

"our continued collaboration with Anthropic"

Read this as: "we get discounts, rate limit increases, a direct line to responsible product managers; in exchange we participate in friendly marketing." It's extremely common in this line of business - typical of database vendors, software tool companies, etc.

This is more in response to my original post, but okay interesting point. (When I said "invested" here I meant invested in finding security flaws.)
In many countries it is mandatory to mark any form of compensated advertising as such. If your claim is true they might be breaking some laws here & there…
Conspiratorial nonsense
I would expect Firefox to be less invested in this than Curl. Firefox is aimed at consumers, Curl is embedded in a wide variety of products.