Post #3226702
2026-06-09 12:34 UTC
@lumi@snug.moe @jdelacueva@mastodon.social @IvanSanchez@mastodon.social @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @fruitchypear@owo.cafe @greatlaketrout@noc.social i agree this is bad. government infrastructure should not be locked into a private vendor. but i do not agree with the stance in principle... just because the system can run an app it doesn't mean it should. we learned that lesson when logging into secure services on shady internet cafe computers... something like your banking app or, indeed, ID wallet might want to set some conditions on where you can use it to prevent possible abuse. that being said, the condition absolutely shouldn't be "we can only run in a place where a foreign private entity can track you".
Replies (1)
-
@lumi@snug.moe 2026-06-09 13:21
@grepe@ieji.de @jdelacueva@mastodon.social @IvanSanchez@mastodon.social @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @fruitchypear@owo.cafe @greatlaketrout@noc.social that's the job of the user. they should be educated not to do things like that opening the can of remote attestation means you pull in a lot of nefarious uses, it's just not worth it