bawolff

23 ms·

511.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> There are no neutral ports there. Every other country past the strait is a US ally with US military bases hosted on their territory. I dont think hosting a US base would necessarily make them non neutral unless that base was used offen
512.
by bawolff 6mo ago
The way i read the parent post, is that the uk decided to invest in other things than military. As a result they are at the whims of USA foreign policy and can't really do much about it. In an alternate world where UK spent more on har
513.
by bawolff 6mo ago
To clarify, i meant shipping to neutral ports (article 99 of San Remo: "A blockade must not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral States" https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/san-remo-ma
514.
by bawolff 6mo ago
The middle east explodes is an eventuality that is within reason to prepare for. Its famously a geopolitical powder-keg.
515.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Which in turn is also against international law (international law would let them retaliate against israel & usa. It doesn't let them target neutral shipping [edit: to clarify i mean neutral shipping going to neutral ports]). Of co
516.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Probably people are betting that the situation resolves itself before shit hits the fan. And there is a bunch of plausible reasons that this belief is not crazy (of course nobody really knows). - trump literally is called TACO - the war is
517.
by bawolff 6mo ago
I feel like the headline is a tad misleading. It makes it sound like rationing will start next week. Where as article actually says. > Fuel suppliers have indicated that May should remain manageable but have flagged “mid to late June as
518.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Jet fuel isn't exactly a consumer good. Storing large quantities of it isn't exactly easy. It doesn't strike me as a good that is likely to panic bought.
519.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Relative to what? Its certainly better than resource extraction (oil).
520.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> make sure that root inside a container is not root outside a container. And its a great idea in general, it just doesn't stop this exploit. The proof of concept becomes root as a quick way to prove it has control of your computer.
521.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Does it matter? The company's liability would (i assume) not change if the ceo authorized it or some other high level figure authorized it. The question to answer is, did it happen and if so is this copyright infringement (not covered
522.
by bawolff 6mo ago
It sounds like they are saying the exploit works but the proof-of-concept doesn't due to superficial reasons(?) That hardly seems like something to brag about.
523.
by bawolff 6mo ago
And in this theory, the reason why nobody else made a popular feed reader was?
524.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Meh. Big tech didnt kill it off, it was already dead at that point. Sometimes things just arent popular no matter how much we might want it to be.
525.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> The term comes about from people choosing tools like "foxit" or "Opera" and saying that those products are safer than their cohorts Adobe/ Firefox because they are attacked less often. That is not where the ter
526.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> A lack of adoption isn't apriori a good argument against an interface I mean it kind of is (perhaps not a priori, but why is that relavent?). If something is not being used, its not meeting needs, so its just increasing attack sur
527.
by bawolff 6mo ago
I disagree 100%. Software security tradeoffs are definitely the sort of thing where you can evaluate arguments on their merits.
528.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Not everything needs to be federated. There is almost no benefit of having federated forges. Just self host if you want.
529.
by bawolff 6mo ago
A sterotypical example would be to have an SUID command that does something the user couldn't normally do, and can be tricked into launching one of these other commands. A less typical example is giving a user restricted shell access w
530.
by bawolff 6mo ago
The best way to mitigate is to setup permissions on files so the user cannot read/write things they arent supposed to. Anything else is tempting fate.
531.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Well yes, that is because they have heard the line and took it as a warning. However just because they are trying doesn't mean they will succeed. Their attempts at diversification still seem very reliant on oil money, and its far from
532.
by bawolff 6mo ago
I think there are only 3. Houthis (iran), PLC (saudi), and STC (UAE). I guess Al-Qaeda and Isis are also there.
533.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> My guess is that is this because UAE has ports on the other side of Hormuz and doesn't want to be restricted in their usage by OPEC? Does OPEC limit that? It would be very surprising to me if they did, as the point of opec is only
534.
by bawolff 6mo ago
> I have been told that when proposing to formalise mathematics these days, you have to explain why you are not using Lean....Amidst the hype around today’s progress, we must remember how we got here. It was not by people following the c
535.
by bawolff 6mo ago
This reads like a pretty standard sentence to me. Especially in the context of a police press release trying to explain tech to the public. I think at some point people see AI everywhere because they look for it everywhere.
536.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Wouldn't that be the exact same as an <img> tag? Img tag disables all scripting.
537.
by bawolff 6mo ago
Which is essentially already how it works. See https://svgwg.org/specs/integration/#secure-animated-mode
538.
by bawolff 6mo ago
There are 3 different methods of animating svgs so it probably depends.
539.
by bawolff 6mo ago
I dont see how that could work, as an <svg> tag in html is not a document boundry. How can you prevent it from accessing a parent doc when its not a separate document. There is iframe srcdoc if you want to do this.
540.
by bawolff 6mo ago
You can bypass the sec-fetch headers via service workers i think. A better approach here would be to just serve svg with Content-security-policy: script-src 'none'; sandbox

More ›