> Imagine a software engineer who has been asked to place a backdoor in some software.
I imagine such an engineer just gets a development plan and doesn't get to see the bigger picture, implying the backdoor. It might only get enabled on integration into a larger codebase, and nobody out of the loop will be able to extrapolate its existence from what they get to know for sure.
Hence I completely agree with the argument of shifting responsibility to the developers. Seems like MS is selling more of that eyewash again.
I imagine such an engineer just gets a development plan and doesn't get to see the bigger picture, implying the backdoor. It might only get enabled on integration into a larger codebase, and nobody out of the loop will be able to extrapolate its existence from what they get to know for sure.
Hence I completely agree with the argument of shifting responsibility to the developers. Seems like MS is selling more of that eyewash again.