zlacker

Unless you sell critical products as described in Annex III[1] the requirements to fulfill CRA are quite harmless. It's mostly stuff you should be doing anyway like a risk assessment and documentation. An additionally requirement is to provide a conformity assessment, which you can do yourself for non critical software, and you must report vulnerabilities within 24 hours.

Not too bad really.

[1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:864f472b-...

>>Larisc+(OP)
The light is quite large and and vague.

>>Larisc+(OP)
Ya so if some kid whose 16 is messing around on his computer figures out some cool app starts publishing it and then bam the incumbents can smack him down.

The regulations are designed to deepen the software moat, and security theater, and I say this as an InfoSec professional.

>>Larisc+(OP)
> critical products

IANAL but Annex III Class 1.2 states: "Standalone and embedded browsers" which would implicate every electron app. Class 1.5 states: "Products with digital elements with the function of virtual private network (VPN)" is so vague it could apply to video game chat messages.

The problem with regulations like this is they're so vague and will be selectively enforced. They won't affect Big Corp but will affect small business and solo developers.

>>hgs3+T8
In my experience with the GDPR it's selectively enforced on large companies and not small mom and pop shops unless they are handling unusually sensitive data. The legal system can only handle a couple of cases at a time, spending that on small shops with inconsequential signal effects isn't their MO.

>>gustav+u8
This is nonsense, because non-commercial activities are exempt from the CRAs requirements.

>>hgs3+T8
With Electron you are not developing an embedded browser, it is a dependency of your product which means you are responsible to keep this dependency secure and up-to-date.

I don't follow how rules for software with VPN functions could apply to a video game chat, but as with all laws intend and interpretation matters. Successfully convincing a judge that your game chat is a Class I critical product is unlikely.

I also don't think that the CRA is too vague. Rules that are too specific will just be circumvented. Enforcement works like any other market rule. You can sell all sorts of non-compliant products in the EU but if you are found out you pay a fine. It won't be any different with the CRA.

>>Larisc+1f
Yes and regulation will ensure non-commercial activities stay that way. I write open source code because I love building software tools and there aren't a whole lot of opportunities to commercialize my work. I'd love it if an opportunity ever came along one day to get rich building a tool, that I could pounce on, in which case I'd love to know that I wouldn't immediately get jumped and mobbed by regulators.

>>gustav+u8
If the same kid decides to throw a party, train their cooking abilities and everyone ends up on hospital due to some stuff they cooked, they will have lots of fun talking to police officers.

>>jart+aj
"Yes, I would like to sell commercial software, but bear no responsibility for the software I'm selling".

If you cook for your friends, but then decide to open a commercial kitchen, do you think you will be exempt fromfood safety regulations?

>>troupo+rT
I'm not exactly building bridges or x-ray machines, or putting food in anyone's mouth. Right now I'm building programs that generate text, and it isn't even real text like in a book that could potentially fall off a shelf and injure someone, we're talking about digital words on a computer that no one except nerds used to care about and anyone is still free to ignore, except normies won't if see an opportunity to rentseek the harmless builders doing it.

>>jart+052
Too much ranting, too little sense. Are you sure you haven't generated it with your generator? ;)

You're trying to carve out an exception for you yourself specifically because you assume that your special case is too special.

1. Laws don't usually work that way

2. There are innumerable cases when "innocuous" software is used as an attack vector precisely because "we don't do nothing why would we keep our software secure"

3. In EU you're safe until you really screw up. More discussion in this thread: >>38819780