Might not be how it appears. The CVE number can be reserved by the org and then "published" with only minimal info, then later update with full details. Looking at the meta data that's probably what happened here (not entirely sure what the update was though):
For threat analysis, you need to know how hard you are to break in, what the incentives are, and who your potential adversaries are.
For each potential adversary, you list the risk strategy; that's threat analysis 101.
E.g. you have a locked door, some valuables, and your opponent is the state-level. Risk strategy: ignore, no door you can afford will be able to stop a state-level actor.
I concur the question, "Who would have an incentive to spend resources on DDoS'ing Codeberg?" is a bit convoluted in mixing incentive and resources. But it's still, exactly, threat analysis, just not very useful threat analysis.
https://github.com/opensearch-project/OpenSearch-Dashboards (Kibana fork) is one. But Grafana is still way better if you just stay away from anything that isn't the core product: data visualization and exploration (explorer and traces).
Talk about a coup against reality. Pay the man his due. Tesla produce very competitive EVs. He has been instrumental in the success of SpaceX and Tesla.
Tasmania doesn't do much sheep farming. They are more into salmon. Maybe you were making a derogatory reference to the local human population? Fair enough.
Please keep arguing about this, it is relieving a lot of stress to watch this. There have to be more facts than just that. I'm serious. This helps me take focus off the rest of the world burning. I'm serious.
reply