this post was submitted on 30 Mar 2024
223 points (98.3% liked)

Cybersecurity

5695 readers
231 users here now

c/cybersecurity is a community centered on the cybersecurity and information security profession. You can come here to discuss news, post something interesting, or just chat with others.

THE RULES

Instance Rules

Community Rules

If you ask someone to hack your "friends" socials you're just going to get banned so don't do that.

Learn about hacking

Hack the Box

Try Hack Me

Pico Capture the flag

Other security-related communities !databreaches@lemmy.zip !netsec@lemmy.world !cybersecurity@lemmy.capebreton.social !securitynews@infosec.pub !netsec@links.hackliberty.org !cybersecurity@infosec.pub !pulse_of_truth@infosec.pub

Notable mention to !cybersecuritymemes@lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This kinda makes sense, corporately. It's technically hosting insecure malicious code... maybe they don't want the liability of redistributing that, even in the git history.

[–] wyre@sh.itjust.works 21 points 7 months ago (3 children)

It also means that Microsoft has unprecedented control over the life of any open source project still hosted on GitHub.

[–] Daxtron2@startrek.website 15 points 7 months ago

If you don't host your own git server, this is always true.

[–] PoliticalAgitator@lemmy.world 12 points 7 months ago

"Unprecedented" except for every single repo that's ever been hosted on a platform the authors didn't own. There's far better battles to pick.

[–] shadycomposer@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

Whoever paying for the server will have control, Microsoft or not.