@arturo182 https://infosec.exchange/@lcamtuf/113709784303148861

So, you might have heard about > or ≥. But are you ready for...

≩ U+2269 GREATER-THAN BUT NOT EQUAL TO

⋛ U+22DB GREATER-THAN EQUAL TO OR LESS-THAN (just remember that ⋛ is not equal to ⋚)

⪌ U+2A8C GREATER-THAN ABOVE DOUBLE-LINE EQUAL ABOVE LESS-THAN (compare to ⪋, ⪒, and ⪑)

And of course, let's not forget the classic ⪔ U+2A94 GREATER-THAN ABOVE SLANTED EQUAL ABOVE LESS-THAN ABOVE SLANTED EQUAL (don't mix that one up with ⪓)

Did you know that Unicode has a symbol for "really equals, but this time I mean it"? It could come in handy for JavaScript

U+003D = EQUALS SIGN
U+2261 ≡ IDENTICAL TO
U+2263 ≣ STRICTLY EQUIVALENT TO

Math trivia: the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stands for Benoit B. Mandelbrot

@saraislet Stuff like that always freaks me out because https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui68zl1BYeg

@mischif "nonissue" is a big word. If a major intelligence agency wants to pwn you, the odds are against you. It's obviously better if you design your software to offer fewer venues of attack, but even that has its limits - see the xz attack against OpenSSH.

In this instance, they went for the path of least resistance. Without this path, their objectives would still be the same, so they would try something else. Hard to know if they would have succeeded.

In essence, when every niche utility on your computer auto-updates, you're dependent not only on the software being non-malicious at t = 0, but also on every dev and their dog staying safe on the internet for all eternity.

The dark side of auto-updates: https://notepad-plus-plus.org/news/hijacked-incident-info-update/

Don't get me wrong, they are *essential* for some software, but the pendulum might have swung too far, adding risk where little risk existed before.