upvote
GOS explicitly stated that they work on a fix, also for other issues and they keep this on their radar.

Google just closed the ticket, without communicating their plan to deal with it. I just stated that we cannot rule out a possibility of foul play, thereby keeping other options open. Keeping that thing in mind which is better known as "the reality" I would be a little bit more wary about Google's stance towards privacy than I would be about GOS though. The difference in how these parties are handling this issue is already a tell.

reply
There's a big difference between "the issue was closed" and "received no acknowledgment". The former is a deliberate action. The latter could be a case of SMTP-ate-my-email.
reply
This is the email we received:

    Hello

    Check: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49096839

    Please upvote/comment/share/mitigate
We passed it along to our developer working on solving VPN leaks. We didn't feel it was necessary to reply to a post linking to a public article. The article was shared with us by our users before we checked out emails.

We have a bunch of internally discovered VPN leaks which are already being worked on and this was added to that workload. We've already shipped a bunch of fixes and will ship more soon. We plan to eventually overhaul the whole system to prevent leaks in a much more systemic way.

reply
Yep, that's a reasonable response. Thanks for your work.
reply
Issue could have been closed by a mis-click, an AI bot gone wrong, a misunderstanding of the issue etc. You can't assert it was deliberate unless e.g. you work in the team that handled it and have inside knowledge. Agree GOS should have benefit of the doubt (too)
reply
your logic would assert a similar conclusion with this scenario:

a person walks up to you, punches you in the face, and leaves.

it could have been an accident, an AI bot, or a misunderstanding. definitely not deliberate.

reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
deleted
reply