archived
stringclasses
2 values
author
stringlengths
3
20
author_fullname
stringlengths
4
12
body
stringlengths
0
22.5k
comment_type
stringclasses
1 value
controversiality
stringclasses
2 values
created_utc
stringlengths
10
10
edited
stringlengths
4
12
gilded
stringclasses
7 values
id
stringlengths
1
7
link_id
stringlengths
7
10
locked
stringclasses
2 values
name
stringlengths
4
10
parent_id
stringlengths
5
10
permalink
stringlengths
41
91
retrieved_on
stringlengths
10
10
score
stringlengths
1
4
subreddit_id
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_name_prefixed
stringclasses
1 value
subreddit_type
stringclasses
1 value
total_awards_received
stringclasses
19 values
null
b1ackcat
null
Ok great, that's what I thought. I'm definitely not pushing"just HTML". I'm confused a bit by your second point though. You have to use *something* for session management, and, at least in .Net Core, it was almost no work to use JWT (one mostly copy paste class from a tutorial and a couple lines of configuration in Startup. cs). Maybe other languages have it harder, but is it really that much more work to use tokens over sessions? Especially considering tokens alleviate the need to store anything serverside wrt session state (unless, I suppose, you need to track something cumulative that's currently WIP over a series of API requests, but even then you *could* store needed data in claims, even if it's messy)
null
0
1491100187
False
0
dfpr3hx
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpq4i6
null
1493719584
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
b1ackcat
null
I like to use one of several forms of the Navy seal copy pasta, personally. :P
null
0
1491100352
False
0
dfpr72p
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpq7dr
null
1493719633
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
ReallyGene
null
No, the 80286 provided *extended* memory by offering Protected Mode with descriptor tables allowing flat 24-bit addressing. Unfortunately, while there was an instruction to enter PM, there was no such instruction to return to Real (segment) mode. It required a hack involving the keyboard controller to make that happen. This oversight was corrected in the 80386. EMS was basically a bank-switching mechanism that created a window in the first megabyte of memory where data could be copied to/from memory on an EMS board. As described, this toolchain is small model only (64kB total RAM).
null
0
1491100498
1491100689
0
dfpradf
t3_62sqe6
null
null
t1_dfpj3ko
null
1493719676
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
sacundim
null
> People too stupid to read security guidelines deserve to be hacked Maybe. How about their end users? Do they deserve to be victimized because they used a site whose developers are incompetent? Without dwelling too much on individual cases (which can often be debated endlessly), framework makers need to take *some* responsibility for anticipating how other developers are likely to abuse their tools, and make them if not foolproof at least misuse resistant. Not for foolish developers' sake, but for regular folks'.
null
0
1491100538
1491109997
0
dfprb8k
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpnt0l
null
1493719688
40
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FascinatedBox
null
When I get back to the project, I should fix that and normalize a lot of the growing. To address your points: 1: oops 2: Code buffers should start at 8, because the largest single write is for 5 at a time. Any arbitrary-sized writes will have a separate prep called beforehand. bigger writes have a prep called beforehand which should do the 'loop until big enough' approach. So, for now, those should be fine. But I'll fix that when I get back to the project.
null
0
1491100548
False
0
dfprbgn
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0le
null
1493719690
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Uncaffeinated
null
What would you prefer? OCaml? Haskell? Rust is influenced by OCaml, and has useful functionality like pattern matching and sum types.
null
0
1491100563
False
0
dfprbsb
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpq9un
null
1493719695
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
RustDragon
null
> Enums are better in exchange for being the size of the largest variant. Unions are always the size of the largest variant. Enums are that plus the size of a tag.
null
0
1491100747
False
0
dfprfnr
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0ia
null
1493719747
43
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
I think if you read the responses of actual Rust core team members, this isn't a fair comment. The language isn't perfect, and realistic criticism is always good.
null
0
1491100777
False
0
dfprg9f
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfppwd0
null
1493719755
23
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
thanks
null
0
1491101113
False
0
dfprnce
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprfnr
null
1493719851
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
william01110111
null
I'm sorry I haven't done as much to improve C++ as you have (assuming from this comment you are on the C++ committee, or else you would never be mad at a random unqualified (as I explicitly state in the article) 19-year-old with a fun side project for not improving one of the most complex languages in the world)
null
0
1491101199
False
0
dfprp5l
t3_62ixbc
null
null
t1_dfp61j9
null
1493719876
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
nilamo
null
Google invented recursion?
null
0
1491101241
False
0
dfprq11
t3_62szbn
null
null
t3_62szbn
null
1493719887
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
xxxmuffinflavoredxxx
null
lol does any of this really need to be that complicated?
null
0
1491101247
False
0
dfprq5b
t3_62vx64
null
null
t3_62vx64
null
1493719889
-35
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
lithium
null
> ...And someone comes and attempts to at least make an incrementally better solution, and they're vilified over it I don't think that's what people get annoyed by, at least I don't. The rust "evangelist" crowd are irritating, and are often inexperienced programmers who heard "rust is good" from someone they respect and then proceed to spam their new "opinion" everywhere with a comment section. This has nothing to do with mozilla, or their attempts at addressing a problem they've decided needs fixing. On a personal note, my codebase is 99% C++ for many reasons specific to my work. It comes across as arrogant when someone who has no knowledge of my requirements / constraints tells me that I'm an idiot for not writing everything in rust, as though i didn't evaluate it and make an informed decision against it. I imagine that annoys a few other people as well.
null
0
1491101326
False
0
dfprrsb
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0ia
null
1493719912
56
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Sn0zzberries
null
I believe that is the case, but sort of the other way around, DNS is just the hash table for hash ranges. Basically each one of the song stores will publish TXT records of song hashes it is offering, so essentially the polling client can determine the best offering using DNS. It makes sense really, all songs are distributed and there is no longer a database to query for the hosting storage. The database becomes DNS, which is already fairly efficient at that type of lookup.
null
0
1491101745
1491102059
0
dfps0l6
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpq05v
null
1493720029
47
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kibwen
null
It's also worth noting that Rust does have untagged C-style unions. They're currently implemented in nightly, and are on track to be stable by 1.18 (current release is 1.16).
null
0
1491101810
False
0
dfps1yq
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprfnr
null
1493720048
28
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kitsunde
null
You're not allowed to keep sessions on the server if you want to be RESTful, so if you only have straight up tokens or basic auth or some such then the request would be completely transactional. [Because](https://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm#sec_5_1_3): > We next add a constraint to the client-server interaction: communication must be stateless in nature, as in the client-stateless-server (CSS) style of Section 3.4.3 (Figure 5-3), such that each request from client to server must contain all of the information necessary to understand the request, and cannot take advantage of any stored context on the server. Session state is therefore kept entirely on the client. You could say JWT gets around that by keeping session information on the client that can get pushed along. But that's arguably not a good idea: http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2016/06/13/stop-using-jwt-for-sessions/ (a bit of a whiny post, but it's basically correct) Any remotely competent developer would be able to setup an initial implementation JWT using a library in any language, it's not really much of an issue. You do have to start thinking about various issues though like (off the top of my head): * What should I be storing in the JWT. * Managing the payload of the JWT. * Tracking whatever encryption is associated with the JWT. * Keeping whatever JWT libraries used updated. * With JWT you now have concurrent sessions if the user has multiple devices in ways they don't if you're using plain sessions or tokens. * Lifecycle issues with regards to stale data, expiring token and migrating the format. Like here's literally the same thing as the article but for JWT: https://auth0.com/blog/brute-forcing-hs256-is-possible-the-importance-of-using-strong-keys-to-sign-jwts/ Next post same blog https://auth0.com/blog/critical-vulnerability-in-json-web-encryption/ security vulnerability. Regular tokens don't have these particular problems because they are just random and don't carry payloads, neither does basic-auth. Auth0 has a lot of good up to date stuff on JWT including a book: https://auth0.com/e-books/jwt-handbook I'm not saying JWT is bad in any way. I just want the smallest reasonable thing to think about, which in most cases is just plain tokens or basic-auth.
null
0
1491102127
1491102448
0
dfps8st
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpr3hx
null
1493720141
7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SuperImaginativeName
null
It was a reference to reddits hive-mind mentality in regards to Rust.
null
1
1491102173
False
0
dfps9so
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprg9f
null
1493720154
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
Are you familiar with the phrase "principles before personalities" though? Just because certain personalities in the community are annoying (the case you described _is_ annoying) doesn't mean that the principle of the technology is bad. I spent about 3.5 years in what I would call a large C++ codebase as well. While I was home reading Modern C++ Design, Effective C++, and a bunch of other C++ tomes, some of my coworkers weren't. We eventually wrote a test that randomly clicked the UI, and it couldn't run more than 30 seconds at first. Crash after crash, lots of times in code that was written way before I joined the company, but almost always use-after-free and double-free. We eventually fixed enough crashes where the test could be left running overnight successfully. From my point of view, if we could prevent that from happening in the first place, it's a worthwhile endeavor. No one should ever be calling you an idiot or implying that they know better than you.
null
0
1491102223
False
0
dfpsavo
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprrsb
null
1493720168
41
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Sn0zzberries
null
The complexity comes from efficiency at scale. Doing it on one or two servers is extremely easy, doing it for thousands of servers in a number of datacenters is where it becomes difficult. It does make me interested to test the lookup times of a database versus the DNS lookup they are doing. I assume the testing would show DNS being more efficient with the way they are using a DHT for song lookup. As for service lookup, DNS is pretty much the standard for that regardless.
null
0
1491102311
False
0
dfpscrc
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfppu5m
null
1493720194
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SuperImaginativeName
null
Not related but I wanted to rant. I am god damn sick of shitty and unreliable DNS's. Either it's my ISP fucking me over by just having their DNS service stop randomly at times. Or DNS somewhere along the line stopping a site working for me. What's that, you was listening to a playlist on Spotify? Nope, DNS gone so the next track won't load because the request it sends out for the next track will fail. I've given up, I set my DNS server to 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 on my router because Google seem to be the only ones running a reliable DNS service anymore.
null
0
1491102429
False
0
dfpsfac
t3_62vx64
null
null
t3_62vx64
null
1493720228
36
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
Right, and I was commenting on the oddly similar hive-mind bashing of anything that's pro-Rust.
null
0
1491102440
False
0
dfpsfhm
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfps9so
null
1493720230
43
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
hogg2016
null
(I had edited to add a 3., probably after you started answering.) I'll add a 4 too :-) : 4. *lily_emitter.c*: in `lily_free_emit_state()`, it looks like you forget to free the `tm` field (unless it is freed by other means I didn't notice).
null
0
1491102452
False
0
dfpsfqm
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprbgn
null
1493720233
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kibwen
null
>> rustc is slow >This is true, and should be improved. That's been an enormous focus of effort this year, and the beta for incremental compilation is now opt-in on the nightly release. See https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/incremental-compilation-beta/4721 for more info.
null
0
1491102651
False
0
dfpsjy9
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0ia
null
1493720290
14
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
tkannelid
null
Batch processing programs with short lifespans tend to be more forgiving about memory leaks. You forgot to free half the time? No worries, the memory will be freed automatically in a couple seconds when the program finishes. And compilers don't need to free memory that often anyway. What you want is efficient and convenient string handling. Java and C#, for instance, are reasonable on the convenience front, but not so great for efficiency. (Most notably, taking a substring copies the underlying data, which is unnecessary -- strings are immutable.) D's string handling is both convenient and efficient, but there's a huge library problem, and there's no automated binding tool that I managed to get working.
null
0
1491102705
False
0
dfpsl2v
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpq9un
null
1493720306
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
geeeoooort
null
Or just stop using dns a third party dns resolver and resolve addresses yourself
null
0
1491102924
1491107738
0
dfpspo3
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpsfac
null
1493720367
20
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
Honestly can't wait to observe the improvement.
null
0
1491102973
False
0
dfpsqpy
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpsjy9
null
1493720382
8
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FascinatedBox
null
Yeah, I didn't see the third point. 3: Yeah, those should be consistent. I need to revisit a lot of the grow code. From memory, I believe a lot of that I wrote a longer time ago. Not too long ago, msgbuf was only doing one-time grows, because again, I didn't loop to check. 4: Parser frees tm. I've been pretty aggressive with valgrind.
null
0
1491103043
1491105413
0
dfpss8o
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpsfqm
null
1493720402
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SEA-Sysadmin
null
Nothing about this is especially complex for a service of this scale.
null
0
1491103123
False
0
dfpstz7
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfppu5m
null
1493720425
20
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491103239
1491103707
0
dfpswfr
t3_62xi6p
null
null
t3_62xi6p
null
1493720459
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FireReadyAim
null
As a default? Definitely. But it shouldn't strongarm you into doing what the software creator believes is the "right" thing.
null
0
1491103261
False
0
dfpsww9
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpohi1
null
1493720465
-12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491103329
False
0
dfpsy89
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfppx38
null
1493720482
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
PrintStar
null
I'd like to see a benchmark supporting the claim that GCC could produce faster 8086 code because I'm not convinced that it can outdo OpenWatcom. I'm open to being pleasantly surprised, though!
null
0
1491103447
False
0
dfpt0q3
t3_62sqe6
null
null
t1_dfpdbjr
null
1493720515
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
That's the point... it eludes even really smart people.
null
0
1491103543
False
0
dfpt2v4
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfppx38
null
1493720544
22
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
hogg2016
null
> 4: Parser frees tm. OK, I trust you. I am just browsing functions as independent units, so I don't see the big picture :-)
null
0
1491103606
False
0
dfpt485
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpss8o
null
1493720563
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kirbyfan64sos
null
And here I am just wishing for more J-POP...
null
0
1491103665
False
0
dfpt5ic
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpmnaa
null
1493720579
10
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
lithium
null
> Are you familiar with the phrase "principles before personalities" though? Just because certain personalities in the community are annoying (the case you described is annoying) doesn't mean that the principle of the technology is bad. That's what I was trying to say with the first part of my comment. I rarely see anybody shit on rust as a technology, at least no more than any other language, it's the community that's a problem. Even that is probably unfair, because i'm sure the majority of people are just banging out rust code at their jobs and don't feel the need to proselytise about it. As for preventative measures, that's a fair point if it applies to your business, but thankfully my company is small enough that a programmer that's constantly introducing crashing bugs will just be fired or moved off the project. The vast majority of my projects are just me anyway, which I realise is non-typical and probably naturally avoids some of the issues that creep in when a larger team is involved. It's probably why rust's safety (which feels like babysitting) never appealed to me, I just don't seem to run into the problems people complain about with C++.
null
0
1491103681
False
0
dfpt5u4
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpsavo
null
1493720584
28
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SuperImaginativeName
null
How would i do that without a DNS server?
null
0
1491103840
False
0
dfpt95l
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpspo3
null
1493720628
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
editor_of_the_beast
null
Look at this, we just had a reasonable conversation :D
null
0
1491104000
False
0
dfptcc1
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpt5u4
null
1493720670
14
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
grimtooth
null
4.2.2.1 good as well
null
0
1491104115
False
0
dfptemh
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpsfac
null
1493720701
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kurashu89
null
The point of the article is that these frameworks do support that (well, Django does, not sure about the others but It's be surprised if they didn't) its that setting your secret key to something shitty makes your security shit.
null
0
1491104150
False
0
dfptf9t
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpl627
null
1493720709
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
geeeoooort
null
Use your own resolver
null
1
1491104207
False
0
dfptge2
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpt95l
null
1493720724
-1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
srs1978
null
They won't license it ...
null
0
1491104237
False
0
dfptgxs
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpt5ic
null
1493720732
8
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
LofeeZ
null
My password is about to be MAX300. No one will be able to pass it without hacking
null
0
1491104477
False
0
dfptlml
t3_62jxlz
null
null
t3_62jxlz
null
1493720794
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
paul_h
null
It is called Branch by Abstraction because it is about source control. Not branching specifically (Trunk Based Development). Think about it this way - "branch by abstraction instead of branch by source control" Re strangulation - you can do that without BbA. Sources - http://paulhammant.com/categories.html#Branch_by_Abstraction,_etc and http://paulhammant.com/categories.html#Application_Strangulation
null
0
1491104570
False
0
dfptnjc
t3_62kf5e
null
null
t1_dfn7x4p
null
1493720820
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
JWooferZ
null
But you can't dude. You have to understand this. i.e say you generate a key every time. Then the developer doesn't have to set it himself, ok, but then he commits the dev and staging keys (one key if the developer is a retard, where in reality all keys should be different) to version control, then some hacker makes it to the company internal wiki [\(like that one russian guy in an article a few weeks back that did it to yahoo\)](https://medium.com/@chrismcnab/alexseys-ttps-1204d9050551) and suddenly the keys are compromised. Or they decide to "open source the site" and they keys are there,[ or they open source and do shit like this](https://github.com/search?q=removed+password&type=Commits&utf8=%E2%9C%93) What do you do then? No difference would have been made. Idiot devs will be idiots, and if you secure it one way, they'll fuck up another way (i.e hosting the server on the company network as well as another unsafe site, so even if the server is secure from all direct attacks, it gets fucked by a side channel). This is why sec people have a job, because pentesting is a thing and not every dev is security minded. There's just no one size fits all for idiocy. Some big companies eventually get hacked not because they have bad server devs, for example, but bad sysadmins or people using unpatched wordpress. It's all the same. I just find the article silly because Instead of saying "fuck sessions anyway, they're more vulnerable than tokens which you can sign and validate against", they just keep on and on about the same thing.
null
0
1491104629
False
0
dfptomq
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfprb8k
null
1493720834
-4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FascinatedBox
null
I just pushed a commit fixing a genuine possible buffer overflow, so 0 seconds.
null
0
1491105171
False
0
dfptyxy
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfppoci
null
1493720974
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Aidenn0
null
Oh gosh, you're right, my memory is totally wrong. Probably because (as far as I can tell) other than OS/2 not much used protected mode on the 80286. Just now looking up I am unable to tell if windows 3.x ran in protected mode or not on an 80286.
null
0
1491105324
False
0
dfpu1rr
t3_62sqe6
null
null
t1_dfpradf
null
1493721012
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
durface
null
If I knew people would upvote blog-padding articles like this, I'd have started a blog!
null
0
1491105347
False
0
dfpu26m
t3_62ul90
null
null
t3_62ul90
null
1493721017
12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Kerbonut
null
I have to support hundreds of devices with 80186C CPUs. One of the problems I've run into is when updating the software on them, the image file has to be broken up into multiple segments with offsets because the software is written to the device's RAM. The issue is not knowing how to break up the image file for each segment.
null
0
1491105372
False
0
dfpu2o5
t3_62sqe6
null
null
t1_dfp7czp
null
1493721024
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
With iterm2
null
0
1491106204
False
0
dfpuj6g
t3_62u62i
null
null
t1_dfphsg2
null
1493721243
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491106282
False
0
dfpukmb
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfprq5b
null
1493721263
37
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
MengerianMango
null
Rewrite it in rust! /s
null
1
1491106420
False
0
dfpun5w
t3_62wye0
null
null
t3_62wye0
null
1493721297
-6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SarahC
null
.NET does this by design! It's not an all bad platform.
null
0
1491106427
False
0
dfpunbo
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpftjt
null
1493721299
9
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
SarahC
null
How similar to that is Hashcat OCL?
null
0
1491106539
False
0
dfpupl0
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpl8aq
null
1493721329
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
themadweaz
null
Shouldn't need a security key for session management... I don't know why it would be required. See: [owasp manifesto](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Projects/OWASP_Secure_Web_Application_Framework_Manifesto/Releases/Current/Manifesto) And to that point, the framework he is talking about does not have CORS protection by default (can install it with an optional gem and a block of config), and has to enable httponly (off by default). I find that kind of shit in a framework, so maybe avoid it until it provides sane defaults? But to each their own. I like living dangerously as well. Laughable though, when a language like php has better session management / cookie security than a chosen web framework...
null
1
1491106589
1491107113
0
dfpuqkx
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfptf9t
null
1493721342
0
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491106827
False
0
dfpuv7y
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpsww9
null
1493721406
-4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
MorrisonLevi
null
I can't tell from your replies if the irony of the situation was lost on you, so I thought I'd point it out. Also, congrats on actually writing Lily. A lot of hobby programming languages aren't this fleshed out.
null
0
1491106918
False
0
dfpuwz9
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfptyxy
null
1493721429
22
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FascinatedBox
null
In the commit I put buffer overflow in all caps because I noticed that too. Also, thanks.
null
0
1491107277
False
0
dfpv3rn
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpuwz9
null
1493721519
6
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
ivosaurus
null
In case you want to store data in the cookie, you need a persistent key so that [any/a] server can decrypt the data to use. Ofc, if possible, the solution to that is to store client data server-side and retrieve with an id, instead of storing it in the cookie.
null
0
1491107320
False
0
dfpv4k9
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpuqkx
null
1493721530
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
xxxmuffinflavoredxxx
null
I'm a full stack software engineer (and a damn good one too I might add) There are plenty of companies all over the world handing low latency services around the globe. I'm sure they get by just fine without a 10 page long DNS bowl of soup. This article read like Spotify has way too many engineers on payroll and they are over-engineering the fuck out of this particular part of the stack
null
0
1491107426
False
0
dfpv6hd
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpukmb
null
1493721555
-61
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
adrianmonk
null
Everybody uses their own resolver. Maybe you mean use your own caching nameserver?
null
0
1491107550
False
0
dfpv8rk
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfptge2
null
1493721586
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
geeeoooort
null
No, using something like unbound on pfsense. A recursive dns resolver
null
0
1491107697
False
0
dfpvbi2
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpv8rk
null
1493721622
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
midnightbrett
null
So say we all
null
0
1491107724
False
0
dfpvbyj
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpm3iy
null
1493721628
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
themadweaz
null
Yes that is the recommended way to handle sessions. I would avoid using any framework that did not do that BY DEFAULT if security was a consideration. See: [correct part of the manifesto](https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Projects/OWASP_Secure_Web_Application_Framework_Manifesto/Releases/Current/Manifesto#Session_Management)
null
0
1491107839
False
0
dfpvdwr
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpv4k9
null
1493721654
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
mabrowning
null
I have some local changes to hashcat that extend the salt limit up to ~1kB, but I don't recommend that.
null
0
1491108067
False
0
dfpvi87
t3_62ul90
null
null
t3_62ul90
null
1493721712
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491108199
False
0
dfpvkk4
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0le
null
1493721743
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
ifnull
null
Yes but stupid people will just go to StackOverflow and look for ways to disable that. Idiots ... Find a way.
null
0
1491108272
False
0
dfpvlwr
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpohi1
null
1493721761
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
hawleyal
null
It doesn't make is easier or harder to alter the server traffic in the slightest.
null
0
1491108350
False
0
dfpvnaq
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfppt0a
null
1493721780
20
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
zerexim
null
Regarding praising linked lists (over arrays) - what about cache locality?
null
0
1491108354
False
0
dfpvnde
t3_62wye0
null
null
t3_62wye0
null
1493721781
12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
hawleyal
null
Every framework does this by design. The author of this article is beyond silly.
null
0
1491108378
1491150505
0
dfpvnsw
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpunbo
null
1493721787
-15
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
tormats
null
you are so fucking out of your depth and paygrade here it hurts. Goto bed.
null
0
1491108638
False
0
dfpvsgw
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpv6hd
null
1493721850
38
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Shalard_doctor
null
Why don't we add every vendor in the OS stack to the name. There are many many software packages in the OS that are not part of gnu
null
0
1491108949
False
0
dfpvxw5
t3_62tki4
null
null
t1_dfpd5az
null
1493721921
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
FascinatedBox
null
I just wanted to make a joke about what's involved in making one. I'm the wrong person to answer this anyway, because I overuse them.
null
0
1491109004
False
0
dfpvyt9
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpvnde
null
1493721934
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
tscs37
null
See stack overflow.
null
0
1491109166
False
0
dfpw1pn
t3_62jpnd
null
null
t1_dfpl78x
null
1493721973
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
tscs37
null
See stack overflow
null
0
1491109183
False
0
dfpw20s
t3_62jpnd
null
null
t1_dfpi3lu
null
1493721977
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
johnaman
null
I think windows 3.x caused a LOT of upgrades AFAICR. Mostly because of memory limits on 80286 motherboards.
null
0
1491109410
False
0
dfpw5vp
t3_62sqe6
null
null
t1_dfpu1rr
null
1493722028
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
gunsandcars
null
Someone X-Post to /r/surface XD
null
0
1491109685
False
0
dfpwagd
t3_62x9hx
null
null
t3_62x9hx
null
1493722092
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
XORosaurus
null
And what about recursive lookups?
null
0
1491109713
False
0
dfpwax3
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpvbi2
null
1493722098
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
sli
null
Is there a reason not to use Flutter? From what I've seen of Flutter it seems like a very competent cross platform UI toolkit. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they announced that you can start using Dart/Flutter to write cross platform Android/iOS apps at I/O 2017.
null
0
1491109798
False
0
dfpwcc9
t3_62tki4
null
null
t1_dfpbgu8
null
1493722117
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
auxiliary-character
null
What about insertion speed?
null
1
1491109842
False
0
dfpwd1p
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpvnde
null
1493722126
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
rohbotics
null
But not technically for public use
null
0
1491109907
False
0
dfpwe4z
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfptemh
null
1493722141
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
YourGamerMom
null
Looks cool. Couple thoughts: 1. If you write it in C#, you might be able to get feedback from a larger community (VB -> C# can be a pretty painless transfer) 2. If there is only one variable left un-filled, maybe it should be able to infer which one you would like solved for 3. Choosing which variable to solve for should probably be a drop-down containing a list of valid names, rather than a free-for-all text input.
null
0
1491109926
False
0
dfpwegc
t3_62x23z
null
null
t3_62x23z
null
1493722145
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
sacundim
null
> i.e say you generate a key every time. Then the developer doesn't have to set it himself, ok, but then he commits the dev and staging keys (one key if the developer is a retard, where in reality all keys should be different) to version control [...] Not if [the framework never writes the generated keys to disk](https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/62ul90/one_line_of_code_that_compromises_your_server/dfpqx9y/). > Idiot devs will be idiots, and if you secure it one way, they'll fuck up another way [...] The problem is that this is simultaneously (a) true but also (b) a thought-terminating cliché used to excuse all sorts of misuses that a tool developer could have reasonably anticipated and guarded against. Like, say, [shipping a default configuration that allows unauthenticated admin access](https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5mq3y4/mongodb_apocalypse_is_here_as_ransom_attacks_hit/). And if it was just between the framework developer and the application developers then sure, screw the app devs, but again the problem is that it's *end users* that routinely get hit by the bulk of the shrapnel.
null
0
1491109966
False
0
dfpwf3w
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfptomq
null
1493722154
10
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
steveklabnik1
null
... unless the type is NonZero, in which case there's no tag.
null
0
1491110168
False
0
dfpwiex
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprfnr
null
1493722198
12
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Bergasms
null
Checks timestamp. Holy hell, it didn't happen on April first either
null
0
1491110359
False
0
dfpwlhn
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfptcc1
null
1493722239
5
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Pazer2
null
Dude he was SO MAD xddddd I had a mega lol when you NAILED him with the "calm down bro"
null
0
1491110417
False
0
dfpwmg5
t3_62u62i
null
null
t1_dfpa2dt
null
1493722252
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
dagit
null
There is so much more than meets the eye. The type system is very different and the semantics are different too (strict instead of lazy).
null
0
1491110446
False
0
dfpwmwm
t3_62scvv
null
null
t1_dfpqprh
null
1493722258
3
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
zerexim
null
In practice, an array/vector (cache friendly) yields better performance over a linked list, even considering possible reallocations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQs6IC-vgmo
null
0
1491110911
False
0
dfpwub1
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpwd1p
null
1493722358
21
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
Eurynom0s
null
Is OpenDNS no longer considered good?
null
0
1491110960
False
0
dfpwv3r
t3_62vx64
null
null
t1_dfpsfac
null
1493722368
4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
rockyrainy
null
I always wonder out of all these Algo data questions, howuch is actually applicable to the project the team is hiring for?
null
0
1491110979
False
0
dfpwveu
t3_62xwba
null
null
t3_62xwba
null
1493722372
38
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
skulgnome
null
> I think if you read the responses of actual Rust core team members, this isn't a fair comment. So in comes you, making it fair after the fact...
null
1
1491111280
False
0
dfpx05s
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfprg9f
null
1493722435
-4
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
lua_setglobal
null
For those who don't click, how will that work? Transparent transmutation? Compile-time tagging? Unsafe-only?
null
0
1491111322
False
0
dfpx0ue
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfps1yq
null
1493722444
11
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
skulgnome
null
I thought Rust's reference-counted pointers (e.g. Arc) will form cycles, requiring manual lifecycle management.
null
1
1491111337
False
0
dfpx12c
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpr0e0
null
1493722447
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
skulgnome
null
A linked list always yields O(1) latency in push and pop from both ends. Arrays only do O(1) pop from end, or without preserving order; and don't push at head. Optimizations are only appropriate here once the containing algorithm has been determined compatible with arrays' restrictions.
null
0
1491111529
False
0
dfpx44f
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpwub1
null
1493722488
-10
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
kibwen
null
There's no clever machinery involved, the use case is largely for C FFI so the goal is to minimize surprises. From the RFC at https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/1444-union.md : > To preserve memory safety, accesses to union fields may only occur in unsafe code. The only times that you'll be using it over stock `enum` is for FFI or supremely gritty optimization work, which will both already likely be using `unsafe` so it's only a small additional safety burden (in fact it will hopefully make things much safer, as current hacks to get around the lack of C-style unions in FFI are quite brittle).
null
0
1491111710
False
0
dfpx6w0
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpx0ue
null
1493722525
32
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
mcilrain
null
Don't blame the market. If you bought software that doesn't suit your needs that's on you and no one else, I hope you managed to get a refund.
null
0
1491111797
False
0
dfpx893
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpsww9
null
1493722543
-7
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
JoseJimeniz
null
Why would a developer have to change that? Why is the encryption key something you - configure - configure with a password Why are you cookies not configured with the operating system provided machine key instead of a text file password.
null
0
1491112051
False
0
dfpxca6
t3_62ul90
null
null
t1_dfpnt0l
null
1493722597
-2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
[deleted]
null
[deleted]
null
0
1491112193
False
0
dfpxeh6
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpwub1
null
1493722626
1
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
LesserQBit
null
It sounded like that to me as well, the author phrased that so strangely.
null
0
1491112194
False
0
dfpxehi
t3_62szbn
null
null
t1_dfprq11
null
1493722626
2
t5_2fwo
null
null
null
null
127-0-0-1_1
null
While true from a algorithmic perspective, in practice contiguous arrays are almost always faster in the most important factor : time in seconds, even though insertion/removal is O(n).
null
0
1491112764
False
0
dfpxmzu
t3_62wye0
null
null
t1_dfpx44f
null
1493722739
39
t5_2fwo
null
null
null