Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> the author is using a bad faith argument by describing a feature they dislike as an exploit

I read the article and perhaps it's been edited since you commented, but the author states in the introduction that there is a security vulnerability in a feature and provides an exploit. That to me is quite different from calling the feature itself an exploit.

> It's in spec for what the original authors intended. Just like running an executable program is potentially risky, but a design of the system.

While it's true that it is in spec, I see a big difference in terms of how users experience this situation compared to running an executable program. I see this as more analogous to new feature introduced in an executable format that offers a different security guarantee to what users are already comfortable with. I don't see pointing this out as being in bad faith.

I don't believe it's been edited (or I haven't noticed such an edit). However on a subsequent re-read, I can see the author's usage of the term "exploit" is more specific to his example below (the Google Maps attack demo).

While I'd still argue it's "working as intended" (for better or worse), he is at least calling this specific demonstration an exploit rather than the feature as a whole. So I'll step back from that position, at least part way.

Thank you for the clarification on that point.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact