3 ms·
TFA says: > Interactive applications handling the 'payto' URI scheme MUST NOT initiate any financial transactions without prior review and confirmation from th
by SahAssar 6y ago
TFA says:
> Interactive applications handling the 'payto' URI scheme MUST NOT initiate any financial transactions without prior review and confirmation from the user and MUST take measures to prevent clickjacking.
Perhaps read the proposal before criticizing it?
- dx87 6y agoJust because it's written in the RFC doesn't mean that's how it's going to work.
- SahAssar 6y agoIsn't that true for all RFCs? Isn't that the point of an RFC, to say how things should work and interoperate? You can criticize it for not being detailed enough or it not being realistic for someone to meet the requirements, but the point of an RFC is to say how it should work, not show it working that way.
- andreareina 6y agoJust because the RFC says to do it doesn't mean it's going to be done. How long did it take the browsers to solve clickjacking? > Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- SahAssar 6y agoFair, I apologize. I can't edit the comment anymore to remove it. I assumed the parent didn't read that part since I assumed that if they did they would comment on that section, but I should not have worded it that way.
- heavenlyblue 6y agoI can also write a standard that says something along the lines of “and the server MUST NOT be hackable”
- SahAssar 6y agoAnd that RFC would be criticized for being impossible or not being detailed enough. You can criticize this RFC on the same grounds if you'd like.