dgoldstein0

36 ms·

421.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
probably because of TLS? You can pretty easily block IP ranges at the network layer but blocking domains is harder - blocking the DNS lookup is probably the easiest way to block a domain
422.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
True. But sometimes being in a satellite office just isn't the same as being at HQ.
423.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
this sounds like a good idea. I do have to wonder if you use CSP & https for your own site (because what site deploys CSP without deploying https first?), what sort of http-only directives would even be legal (i.e could successfully lo
424.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
changing the intrinsic size of an image sounds like a "break the web" sort of change. I'm imagining all the super blurry photos / gifs / etc. that will result, and not liking the thought.
425.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
firing onload instead of onerror for a cors failure seems heavy-handed - the ajax spec says cors failure should be treated as network failure, and while that can cause headaches it seems even worse to say something loaded when it in fact di
426.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
Hm, tried this on my Android phone first and it didn't seem accurate - might have found 1 or 2 sites I actually visited, a few I wasn't sure of, and would randomly change between reloads. Seems to work much better on desktop Chro
427.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
... because if a passive attack works and is easier to launch, why bother with an active attack?
428.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
I thought the same. I think at this point we've graduated from "there's already a metasploit / other open source code for it" to "it's probably possible, if you are fairly determined but not necessarily t
429.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
Part of the problem though is that most businesses pass VAT tax on to consumers. Meaning that VAT tax essentially allows businesses to get their customers to foot the tax bill, and that everyone pays taxes corresponding to their consumptio
430.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
The problem is there are some judges in the US who disagree. So ultimately it might not even matter where your data is stored: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/apr/29/us-court-m...
431.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
Based on my reading of this article, IPFS doesn't specify how you store the content - just that the content you provide back matches the requested hash. So in theory this could easily be implemented under the hood. Though perhaps I&#x
432.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
I can sympathesize, but the last think I would want in a language is for benign looking refactorings to changes meaning. E.g. let a: u16; let b: u16; fn f(x: u32) -> ... f(a*b) // 32 bit result let
433.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
on second thought... I can already do this with Chrome's built in abilities to restrict cookies and override those restrictions with exceptions. We'll see how this works. Set Chrome to block all cookies, but for https:/&#x2
434.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
This really makes me want to see what happens if I could make my browser only accept secure cookies (cookies sent over https only). Unfortunately I can't find a chrome extension that implements this.
435.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
yeah... definitely. Cut back on the free offering, and make it "pay to use" for anyone who ends up using it anything resembling daily. Also probably worth making it a subscription ($1/month?) instead of credit-based - subscr
436.
by dgoldstein0 11y ago
I like the general idea of defining protocols that can help password managers work more seamlessly. But this seems too low level. Most online services run HTTP services, and afaict, this protocol wants to run on TCP/TLS (though it do