Hacker News Reader

A notable difference is that a compromise of Cloudflare's key wouldn't [edit: might not] require the bank to notify the Federal Reserve.

It may be pretty cynical to call that situation a "feature". But I'm sure it came up. And I'm sure they noticed.

It certainly wouldn't be the first time "trivial functional difference" translated to "massive legal difference."

View on HN

You should probably say "might not", because although we know a key compromise would require notification, you'd have to have an actual lawyer tell you if a compromise of CloudFlare would not. Unless the lawyers are on board with this as a solution to the notification problem, the whole solution doesn't do anything (legally).

It gets a little cumbersome to hedge casual conversation the way attorneys do, but sure, it would have been more accurate to have said:

"might not, under the current rules, which are always subject to change"

You would think the Federal reserve would just react by increasing the scope of what they have to notify for - seeing as a compromised Cloud Flare server could do something nasty in this scenario.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com