|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I'd like to inform everyone the there is a discussion about a contribution to this article in Talk:BitLocker § Infineon, because the exact same copy of that contribution is made in the BitLocker article, triggering a dispute in both places.
Maybe I'm just nitpicking. But I'm not so sure the whole issue with the RSA library is a controversy. If Infineon purposely weakened the crypto, that would be controversial. But this does not appear to be the case, it's simply faulty code. Oxford Dictionaries defines controversy as Prolonged public disagreement or heated discussion. I don't think there's any disagreement here. If there wasn't a decision to generate weaker prime numbers, there is nothing to disagree about that I see.
I think it should be in a new section, titled Security flaw or something like that. Or, since it is just one flaw, its own section. Or something else, but not under Controversies. Still, I wanted to discuss this first, lest I make a controversial change... Digital Brains (talk) 11:21, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Digital Brains, I agree. I recently made an edit along approximately those lines, but was by Codename Lisa who IIUC felt that the sections weren't substantial enough to stand alone. I'd personally be happy for you to go ahead, but if you'd rather wait for other editors to opine here one way or another so that a broader rough consensus can be built, that might be best. Incidentally, if there has been speculation in a WP:RS that the weak key generation was deliberate (i.e. a backdoor), then this should definitely be added to the section. Zazpot (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
- Done The section about security flaw no longer says controversy. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 05:45, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Infineon Technologies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120327083942/http://www.elektroniknet.de/home/kommunikation/news/n/d/infineon-wireline-wird-lantiq/ to http://www.elektroniknet.de/home/kommunikation/news/n/d/infineon-wireline-wird-lantiq
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
You may set the
|checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting
|needhelp= to your help request.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
If you are unable to use these tools, you may set
|needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.