Comment

Comment by throwaway7356

> You're right, some of the questions are fairly straightforward and should be easy to answer -- I would argue they already did provide an initial response here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2083449#c11

The comment you link to is from 19th. How could that provide an initial response to a mail send to them on the 20th? That does not make sense unless they have a time machine.

> But there's 12 separate questions in this comment alone https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2083449#c30 many of which are demanding detailed information and statistics that would need to be reconstructed from audit logs.

But that is not the set of questions that were ignored for the deadline.

> I imagine lawyers are involved because whatever answers they give will inevitably wind up as evidence in ensuing lawsuits. I'm sure anything publicly released needs to be cleared through several layers of review.

If they want to lawyer up, they should better be removed from trust stores where trust is more important than admitting the absolute minimal amount possible to lawyer up for lawsuits.

Or they could try to regain some trust, but it looks like they don't want that as a closer look might find more issues, like the other post about their broken login process.

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton