> One commenter here is asking for more, for punishment, another demands their security team be fired. And I mean, if someone wants to try to sue Zoom for misusing the term E2EE then go for it, but obviously Zoom can't "punish itself" in a blog post, and pinning it on a few bad engineers feels like a scapegoat.
A portion of the development community loves to talk about blameless post-mortems and a blame-free culture until a tech company like Zoom does something they don't like.
I think it's generally a poor assumption to assume that any two internet "crowds" are the same people. Some commenters care about X and some about Y and we can almost never tell what the overlap between those groups is. The hivemind is not as uniform as that.
Well, speaking solely for myself, I am more willing to forgive genuine bugs or even targeted attacks (supposing the company being attacked was doing the right things e.g. no weakly hashed passwords, keeping as little PIA as they can get away with, proper isolation) over misfeatures that hint at deep company culture problems ("Hmmm, how can we profit from our users' data, even though they're already paying us?")
While I agree with you, I can imagine people who prefer being blameless towards accidental mistakes (engineer ssh'd into a wrong host and dropped prod DB instead of testing) but demand proper punishment of "misfeatures" created on purpose (like spying on users).
> until a tech company like Zoom does something they don't like.
Consistently does something they don't like. Most people forgive single instances, but they don't forgive patterns as much. Especially when the patterns look like they are on purpose.
A portion of the development community loves to talk about blameless post-mortems and a blame-free culture until a tech company like Zoom does something they don't like.