akersten

59 ms·

751.
by akersten 6y ago
Maybe Zoom wasn't willing to pay the sticker price: > Vice has reported that someone is claiming to have a zero-day exploit affecting the Zoom app for Windows, and they’re asking $500,000 for it. The remote code execution exploit al
752.
by akersten 6y ago
Thanks, that's a pretty nifty systemd command[1]. Sadly my confusion is only furthered, since I'm seeing both target files and daemons (although maybe they're both considered 'units' in systemd) and now a new name (
753.
by akersten 6y ago
I love Paint .NET, but I wince every time I go to their website (which is not paint.net) to download it: the download button[1] gives me strong "clicking this will give you a shareware virus from 2005" vibe. It is also very sket
754.
by akersten 6y ago
Ugh, this resonates with me so much. I recently tried to fix some kind of mundane network issue (had a Fedora machine configured for a static IP and wanted to use DHCP instead), and the absolute mess of tooling that is the Linux networking
755.
by akersten 6y ago
That's the category of bug (use after free), but that's not the root cause. The root cause would be found from an analysis of the kernel design to understand why it was possible to get into this scenario in the first place. Uncoor
756.
by akersten 6y ago
Google, Mozilla, et al. should make a commitment to revoke the trust of any CA that is found to partake in behavior like that. Even retroactive revocation of existing certificates shouldn't be off the table if the offense is egregious
757.
by akersten 6y ago
> So, to summarize: the LightSpeed bug was fixed in iOS 12 with a patch that didn't address the root cause and instead just turned the race condition double-free into a memory leak. Then, in iOS 13, this memory leak was identified a
758.
by akersten 6y ago
In that case, the email is the username, and the problem remains: are josh@gmail.com and jоsh@gmail.com the same user? To the system, of course they're different - it's just looking at the bytes. Problem comes when a human interac
759.
by akersten 6y ago
It's fairly long and winding but the main point seems to be that because Unicode exists, and Unicode supports characters that are problematic for the concept of a unique identity, then it is the concept of a unique identity that is the
760.
by akersten 6y ago
While making a favicon recently, I noticed it was scaling strangely in the Firefox Awesomebar. Turns out it wasn't a square icon - it was less tall vertically than it was wide - but Firefox scaled it up in both dimensions until it was
761.
Obnoxicon – wide favicon bug in Firefox(obnoxicon.site)
1 points by akersten 6y ago|1 comments
762.
by akersten 6y ago
Oh, this is for putting an icon next to search results? Yeah, that changes the calculus considerably. I thought this was about showing the favicon in the browser for a site the user visits (per the issue title). In that case, yeah, I don&#x
763.
by akersten 6y ago
It still seems trivial to me. Parse all meta icon tags, prefer one that matches exact client resolution of current display (don't even have to download the icons - the sizes are defined as part of the meta tag), else use the largest-re
764.
by akersten 6y ago
That's an interesting question! I don't have aphantasia, and can visualize things pretty vividly - but I also resorted to "verbal memory" to do that calculation. I foiled it like the other comment says (maybe somewhat of
765.
by akersten 6y ago
Past a certain price point, kit from any brand delivers photos and photographic performance that one would have a hard time finding technically wrong or inferior to that of another brand. So by all accounts, we should see a lot of variety i
766.
by akersten 6y ago
Sad to see them go - photography's such a great hobby and having competition in the space is healthy. There's a few brands out there still, but there is a noticable stigma in the professional community around equipment that isn&#x
767.
by akersten 6y ago
I dislike the 30% IAP cut as much as the next developer, but what is it about perceived tech monopolies that bring out the hyperbolic comparisons? > Apple should and must be subject to the level of government regulation and oversight th
768.
by akersten 6y ago
The outcome of "breaking up advertising monopolies" can be achieved with existing anti-trust law, without cannibalizing an existing protection that benefits every UGC website large and small. > Is it too much to ask for social
769.
by akersten 6y ago
Facebook carries both messaging traffic and user-generated content. If they support E2E encryption in their messenger, the threat is that they are not "following best practices for law enforcement intercept" and risk losing their
770.
by akersten 6y ago
The cesspool's already on the clearnet, we have examples of what it looks like: 4Chan, Gab, Voat - are all platforms that pride themselves on minimal moderation. If we want the entire internet to either look like that, or force platfor
771.
by akersten 6y ago
I mean there is also a parallel effort led by Bill Barr and some folks in Congress that would effectively remove your S230 protections for running E2E anyway (EARN IT act), so it's a battle we're fighting on all fronts right now.
772.
by akersten 6y ago
Right? And even if there were some magical law that could distinguish between "off-topic" and "on-topic," that would still prevent me from running my little sewing site - because if I truly don't want the KKK hoods
773.
by akersten 6y ago
If Twitter themselves posted a tweet defaming someone, they'd have the exact same liabilities as those reporters at CNN, who are employed by CNN to create content for CNN. Twitter can't be sued for a libelous tweet that someone
774.
by akersten 6y ago
Yes, that's the entire point of Section 230. Should those protections be removed, most of these sites would increase their moderation, and remove anything potentially libelous. A huge chilling effect on speech. There is an ongoing ef
775.
by akersten 6y ago
What? Not only does the legal concept of a "neutral platform" not exist, the examples you cite (Fox, CNN) are certainly not "neutral platforms." They aren't responsible for what their commenters post on their sites
776.
by akersten 6y ago
That interpretation doesn't follow from GP's position of "if you are deciding what is acceptable speech, you're now responsible for it." Removing off-topic posts is just as much "deciding what is acceptable spe
777.
by akersten 6y ago
I only consider sewing-related posts acceptable on my sewing message board. If I moderate anything else, I'm suddenly responsible for any libel that gets posted while I'm asleep? That position is absurd.
778.
by akersten 6y ago
Wow, that seems really messy. If you're just after the API key or whatever, wouldn't reversing the Android app be simpler? As far as I know, you can't do all these low-level tricks on the Java platform.
779.
by akersten 6y ago
Is it really that popular nowadays? I remember it feeling like it was an antiquated platform 6 or 7 years ago before my latest job, and in my head I now imagine it as a MySpace-like dinosaur website. Has it made a resurgence? I might just b
780.
by akersten 6y ago
It's mostly a technical curiosity to me. Although maybe they would if you're using it in a system backup/archive workflow?

More ›