![]() This will improve Firefox's enterprise adoption as it provides the tools to infrastructure/IT/Sysadmin teams to ensure the browser is running a secure version without impacting user experience (e.g. operating system built-in pops, or emails). This means that we can guarantee that after X days, we no longer run any vulnerable browser installs, whereas if it is optional we can't say that with any confidence and would be forced to manually coordinate forced restarts with users using other tools (e.g. The first feature is what you were suggesting but the second one is critical for security reasons. On the final day, a red/critical pop-up would appear informing the user that a browser relaunch will happen automatically in XX hours if they do not click the button, this final pop-up could be dismisable or non-dismisable. Given a 5 day forced restart window, after (configurable) 2 days a yellow/warning dismisable pop-up would appear daily asking the user to click a button to restart the browser. What does "forced to relaunch chrome" mean? Does the browser stop working? or does it simply show a dialog the user can't workaround? The government argues that handing over all ministers' messages to the inquiry - including those of Mr Johnson - would stop them communicating freely in future and that much of the material is irrelevant.Thanks for replying and looking into this It is unusual to get such a quick reply from vendors/etc. She is said to have warned the government that failure to release material would amount to a criminal offence - a claim the government disputes, so is therefore poised to launch a legal challenge. With the clock ticking towards the 4pm deadline, Baroness Hallett is demanding to see all government messages, which she claims are vital for the inquiry's deliberations on COVID decisions. Mr Johnson, prime minister during the pandemic, is battling to prevent the Cabinet Office releasing all his unedited WhatsApp messages and diaries to the inquiry's chairwoman, Baroness Hallett. "We've got the extraordinary situation where Matt Hancock handed over a whole sheath of WhatsApp messages to a journalist without any apparent sanction under the official secrets act, surely this case for seeing the documents in one of our most important inquiries, probably since Iraq, must be much more compelling than that."īoris Johnson and Rishi Sunak are preparing to launch a legal battle over COVID secrets, just hours before a deadline for handing over sensitive material to the official pandemic inquiry. ![]() "We are in a bit of a mess at the moment, we don't really know whether WhatsApp has been used as a decision-making tool or, indeed, as just an information-sharing device. I actually think it would set a helpful precedent if Lady Hallett prevailed in this fight about the information. "I have to say I think they're misguided on this situation. But there's also the Cabinet Office fighting for a principle of confidentiality. He told the BBC: "There's some cover-up going on here to save embarrassment of ministers. In a ruling last week, Baroness Hallett rejected the argument that the inquiry's request was unlawful and claimed that the Cabinet Office had "misunderstood the breadth of the investigation".Īs we reported earlier, today is the deadline for the Cabinet Office to hand over a number of Boris Johnson's unredacted WhatsApp messages and diary entries.īaroness Hallett is demanding to see all government messages before 4pm today, which she claims are vital for her inquiry's deliberations on COVID decisions.īut the former head of the Civil Service Lord Kerslake said there appears to be a "cover-up", as ministers seem set to block the release of unredacted messages.In May the Cabinet Office pushed back against the request, which was made under section 21 of the Inquiries Act 2005 and which also applies to messages from former adviser Henry Cook.The row was sparked by a legal request sent by the inquiry on 28 April for a number of materials, including unredacted WhatsApp messages and diaries belonging to the former prime minister between January 2020 and February 2022.There has so far been little sign that ministers are set to shift from the position that the government has no duty to disclose "unambiguously irrelevant" material.The Cabinet Office has until 4pm on Tuesday to respond to the request from Baroness Hallett's inquiry.It now appears ministers could be set for a legal battle - as the deadline for releasing the requested information looms. The former prime minister has made headlines again this month, after a row erupted with the Cabinet Office over the release of unredacted WhatsApp messages and documents to the COVID inquiry.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |