I’ve some questions about Ghidra released by NSA on Github. And research about it then saw a ycombinator thread for it. That answer was clever and funny.
As title marked, you really okay for just “open source” to trust it?
I’ve some questions about Ghidra released by NSA on Github. And research about it then saw a ycombinator thread for it. That answer was clever and funny.
As title marked, you really okay for just “open source” to trust it?
Even if we take your definitions, they are still conflicting.
Attacking humans means developing malware.
Defending capital means protecting that capital from others malware.
If either of them do their job too well, the other will be failed. That is by definition conflicting.
Just add certain.
Hack certain humans. Protect certain capital
That doesnt change anything about my original point. They are conflicting missions, whether you add certain or not.
And no matter what you call it, backdooring ghidra defeats the point of both, it means no one will use it, which allows malware to run rampant. (Ghidra was released during the height of the cryptolocker craze, it allowed reversing those crypto lockers to be done by anyone, effectively neutering many of them).
And when it gets caught its immediately attributable to the malware division, which they dont want either.
There is zero point backdooring ghidra. Now XZ? *sshole? Thats the level of sophisticated backdoor I would expect from the NSA.