4 ms·

>That said, NASA/JPL publish code standards, although I imagine most tech companies would balk at giving up their toys and hot languages/frameworks to do fairly

>That said, NASA/JPL publish code standards, although I imagine most tech companies would balk at giving up their toys and hot languages/frameworks to do fairly tedious work like this. For most companies developing non-critical software, applying such harsh coding standards will not be cost effective after all. The cost of you browser crashing is not nearly as high as the cost of a crashing rocket... Besides, even NASA sometimes makes mistakes: http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0416/ http://www.viva64.com/en/b/0416/

w_t_payne 10y ago
I'm sure that there is a happy medium to be found; a modicum of organisation and discipline must surely save more money by avoiding confusion and wasted time than it costs. How much effort does it take to use a linter? To crank the compiler warnings up to maximum? -- versus the time wasted bug hunting and in heroic struggles with spaghetti-monster codebases...
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
Agreed, there are reasons why we do certain things a certain way. But in the age of ransomware and endless cyberwars and nation state spoofing maybe the idea that browsers and other internet facing applications should be barely-shippable shit code is antiquated.
- eremeevp 10y ago
  You can't protect everything, but I'm sure they have a secure browser at NSA )
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    NSA just uses isolation approach in air gaps or hypervisors like these: The high-assurance community in academia and commercial sectors keep building secure browsers, though. One, OP browser, was inspiration for Chrome security model. They severely weakened it for performance. IBOS is probably most interesting. There's links at the comment below. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9969961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9969961 Quark kernel is one that's not in that comment for some reason: http://goto.ucsd.edu/quark/ http://goto.ucsd.edu/quark/
    - nickpsecurity 10y ago
      I just realized I forgot the link with their hypervisors. It doesn't matter because most of them suck. You're better off not seeing it. :)

w_t_payne 10y ago

I'm sure that there is a happy medium to be found; a modicum of organisation and discipline must surely save more money by avoiding confusion and wasted time than it costs. How much effort does it take to use a linter? To crank the compiler warnings up to maximum? -- versus the time wasted bug hunting and in heroic struggles with spaghetti-monster codebases...

drzaiusapelord 10y ago

Agreed, there are reasons why we do certain things a certain way. But in the age of ransomware and endless cyberwars and nation state spoofing maybe the idea that browsers and other internet facing applications should be barely-shippable shit code is antiquated.

eremeevp 10y ago
You can't protect everything, but I'm sure they have a secure browser at NSA )
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  NSA just uses isolation approach in air gaps or hypervisors like these: The high-assurance community in academia and commercial sectors keep building secure browsers, though. One, OP browser, was inspiration for Chrome security model. They severely weakened it for performance. IBOS is probably most interesting. There's links at the comment below. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9969961 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9969961 Quark kernel is one that's not in that comment for some reason: http://goto.ucsd.edu/quark/ http://goto.ucsd.edu/quark/
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    I just realized I forgot the link with their hypervisors. It doesn't matter because most of them suck. You're better off not seeing it. :)