• 4 Posts
  • 76 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 28th, 2023

help-circle








  • is my instinct here outdated/inapplicable?

    Yes.

    It’s so cheap to send SMS messages, and you don’t pay for undeliverable messages, so they can just send to random numbers.

    They also receive deliverability responses for each number. So they know whether a phone received the message whether or not you reply.

    Finally, if you reply STOP you’re unlikely to fit their demographic very well anyway. As in… they’re not trying to reach the type of people who will actively try to avoid receiving these messages.

    That said, there’s probably no point replying STOP because most firms just wont honor it in the long term. As in they might not message you for the remainder of that particular messaging project (campaign), but they’ll just start a new campaign tomorrow with a new sender and no “STOP” requests.


  • I think this is a misconception.

    In the 90s it may have been true - windows was focused on user experience on the desktop. Pre- internet, security just wasn’t relevant.

    Even in that era though, Linux was running on servers in universities et cetera managing many users.

    I guess this is where the reputation arose.

    These days I don’t think either is inherently more secure than another in a general sense.

    For specific uses cases one might be more “reliable” than another just because it’s used more and therefore has more people looking at it. For example, the vast majority of Web servers are in a Linux environment, but the vast majority of on premise email servers would be Windows.

    What I’m saying is, in 2024 the general security of each platform is going to be comparable, and only a very small component in your chain of reliability. Like if you develop a threat model, and write policies, and maintain behaviours in practice, the underlying security provided by the environment isn’t really that relevant.