> victim blaming
That's a frame that carries a negative connotation. Why? Shouldn't builders construct houses that are safe enough? Or are you telling me that the government should prosecute the people responsible for the hacked systems?
> victim blaming
That's a frame that carries a negative connotation. Why? Shouldn't builders construct houses that are safe enough? Or are you telling me that the government should prosecute the people responsible for the hacked systems?
Just like an electrician is liable if your house burns down and their wiring wasn’t up to code [and caused the fire].
We need similar laws/codes for software. It’s time.
Sticking with your analogy, we could probably define a set of standards for baseline IT security for all IT systems…but it probably wouldn’t be very useful. Systems vary so wildly in complexity and scale that coming up with the equivalent of a “code” that fits most systems like we have with electrical installations is impossible.
Yes, which is why I mentioned building codes. I suppose "safe enough" is where the disagreement is.
Should you be prosecuted if a thief smashes your window and steals something you borrowed from a friend?
How incredibly irresponsible of you, to have a window in your home! When will we take security seriously? It is your fault that you were a victim of a crime and you should go to jail for it. /s
That is the current level of software security. That's why I have a joyful smile anytime I read of another hack, because maybe people will start caring about security.
Then why use "victim blaming"?