4 ms·

edit: this was completely wrong, TFA is talking about server side WASM I think the point is that a simple-enough application can be delievered as WASM and run

edit: this was completely wrong, TFA is talking about server side WASM I think the point is that a simple-enough application can be delievered as WASM and run entirely in the user's browser, so there wouldn't be any server-side system to break into? So one could ship e.g. wordpress + db + content in one bundle, and the user would be none the wiser. A wild claim, and probably self-defeating for anyone who needs to protect their content. Otherwise, the WASM-dust at best moves the security boundry to a different service.

ThePhysicist 4y ago
I don't think that's what they mean, Wordpress is a server-side app with a database backend, I don't think you'd want to ship your entire Wordpress database to the browser.
jeremyjh 4y ago
No, CGI is an interface for backend web servers, this is not about client code.
noahtallen 4y ago
It’s already been done! https://make.wordpress.org/core/2022/09/23/client-side-webassembly-wordpress-with-no-server/ https://make.wordpress.org/core/2022/09/23/client-side-webas... (By my colleague Adam!) I think this experiment becomes interesting thinking about times you really want WordPress to be headless (like demoing a plug-in or theme), but less for serving websites to people. Potentially also useful as a testing development environment. I was surprised at how fast it is, since it basically becomes an SPA.