2 ms·
But it isn't... directly. Github.com is their corporate site, hosts their application, and is how we all interact with repositories (via https or git://). But,
by mbreese 6y ago
But it isn't... directly.
Github.com is their corporate site, hosts their application, and is how we all interact with repositories (via https or git://). But, the only data you get from that site has been processed through their application and sanitized.
The only way to get access to the raw user-generated data is through raw.githubusercontent.com or Github Pages which hosted on github.io. And the data from raw.githubusercontent.com has the MIME types set so that you don't get HTML rendered -- only the raw plaintext (I think).
So, in this specific example, if there was someone hosting a phishing site in a github account, it would have been active only through github.io, not the main github.com site. (You could have likely seen the source code from the main site, but it would not have actually generated an HTML form).
For historical views, here is the Github blog post that details the change (2013): https://github.blog/2013-04-05-new-github-pages-domain-github-io/ https://github.blog/2013-04-05-new-github-pages-domain-githu...
- pmontra 6y agoNevertheless some countries blocked github.com, not (only?) githubusercontent.com or github.io https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_GitHub https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_GitHub Probably they think that GitHub didn't sanitize the content on github.com well enough.
- jasonlotito 6y agoThat’s exactly what they are doing, too. Google effectively shut down github.com for the issues in github.io that didn’t exist anymore, in your example. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23425569 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23425569