Cyber Resilience Act

[Alexandru Ermicioi]

On Wednesday, 16 September 2026 at 23:50:31 UTC, Adam Wilson 
wrote:
> ...
> Doing something half-way would be the worst of both worlds. All 
> the legal liability, none of the rigorous compliance that would 
> actually shield us from liability.

There are also non-binding statements, like stating that it will 
be best-effort approach though it will not guarantee full 
compliance (also explicitly say it is nonbinding perhaps).
At minimum would be good to have some guarantees/confirmation, 
that changes making dlf owned software compliant, wouldn't be 
blocked unless there is a reasonable cause.

The point I'm trying to make is, if possible it should be 
compliant so the work necessary to certify it by third party in 
europe is as minimal as possible.