I didn't? I opined web browser "manufacturers" should be liable, like airplane manufacturers. That seems certain to me.
Whether automatic liability makes sense, as argued in OP about workplace safety, is less certain, but probably yes. Many zero days are triggered by just clicking a link. For such cases, it is hard to argue one is operating it wrong.
Computers can't be compared to airplanes because computers operate in an adversarial environment whereas airplanes don't. A computer crashing because of a specially crafted malicious request isn't really comparable to a plane dropping out of the sky. Consider another product that operate in an adversarial environment: locks. Should lock manufacturers be liable if their locks were pickable?
> Being struck by lightning and hail sound plenty adversarial to me.
Not really. lightning and hail behave predictably. Attackers don't. Adversarial hail would be a hailstorm where the hail magically heat-seeked to the engine.
>Meanwhile equifax and co just leave your data unprotected, no adversary required
The parent poster argued for a much stronger statement than this, which includes only negligence.
I think physical metaphores are flawed, but lets just continue for fun: if planes were designed the way software is designed, what is the airplane plane metaphor for buffer overflow? You take too much luggage with you and the plane crashes?
What's the metaphor for privilidge escalation - you dress like a pilot and they let you drive?
Most hacks in computing are preventable by not using languages that are know to be unsafe or testing software priperly. We prioritiae features over safety or reliability.
They are not comparable to someone attacking a plane with a missile.
I think it should be clear to that designers of aircraft and airlines themselves take much more care and responsebility than software designer do.
>I think it should be clear to that designers of aircraft and airlines themselves take much more care and responsebility than software designer do.
But none of the attacks you outlined can actually be prevented by the manufacturer? eg. for luggage the manufacturer just provides a maximum takeoff weight, but that's only verified by the pilots/ground crew. The buffer overflow equivalent would be an app with a buffer overflow vulnerability, but it asks very nicely not to overflow it.
Pilots/crew are part of the system, the manufacturer provides specific guidance and training on handling emergencies. In this case the passenger is the equivalent of the user.
The buffer overflow equivalent would be an app written in a managed language like C#, where buffer overflows are basically impossible.
Is is even possible to make a browser without 0days?