3 ms·
The big deal here is security by default as enforced by the runtime (deno) itself - there is afaik none other doing anything remotely as cool anywhere. It in ef
by dingdingdang 6y ago
The big deal here is security by default as enforced by the runtime (deno) itself - there is afaik none other doing anything remotely as cool anywhere. It in effect makes it super safe to run code since you have to explicitly allow the various levels of system access.
Also makes the system fundamentally unattractive to malware authors whereas installing modules via node.js is like leaving your front door open and taking a chartered holiday while hoping for the best.
- jfkebwjsbx 6y ago> there is afaik none other doing anything remotely as cool anywhere Any operating system with "capabilities", "namespaces", "privileges", etc. That includes Linux, Windows and many others.
- kbenson 6y agoSure. I guess that means deno is sort of providing a lot of the capabilities sysadmin have had for a while in a language. If deno let's you design a program that acts like Qmail with all its separation of concerns and permissions but with one binary, that's a plus.
- dmix 6y agoHow many developers are really using Linux capabilities for their deployments? I highly doubt that many...
- jariel 6y agoMost folks running Node.js instances have control over all of the software they are running and 'security' in this sense just isn't a huge concern. Obviously, more security is alwasy better all things being equal, but it's not the big issue with Node.js. It seems that Deno is probably a nicer, overall version of Node, and if we were 10 years ago, undoubtedly, we would chose Deno. But we're not, we have massive installed bases and operating capabilities, so the choice is less obvious.
- crabmusket 6y agoThe developments in WASI's security model are very interesting - see this post: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/03/standardizing-wasi-a-webassembly-system-interface/ https://hacks.mozilla.org/2019/03/standardizing-wasi-a-webas...