fcvarela

4 ms·

1.
by fcvarela 3y ago
ID.5 listed as least depreciating. Mine was 55k new less than a year ago and it’s worth 30k. Definitely not the 10% mentioned in the article.
2.
by fcvarela 6y ago
This is like saying 'yes' exists in all languages because there's an equivalent in every language... It's... a bit clikbaity
3.
by fcvarela 7y ago
Nice article, may I ask what tools you used to produce the illustrations?
4.
by fcvarela 7y ago
FWIW i've just verified this on a DS1019+ running the latest DSM. My certificate disappeared after rebooting and the default synology one (which I had deleted) reappeared.
5.
Synology replacing user certificates with their own revoked one
9 points by fcvarela 7y ago|2 comments
6.
by fcvarela 8y ago
As frustrated with Apple as the next person, but I have never experienced this using a bunch of interfaces and devices with their own clock source...
7.
by fcvarela 10y ago
The spec doesn't govern what applications can and cannot accept, it governs what contents are valid in tokens. 'None' is valid, that means my parser library will accept it, it doesn't mean my application must accept the
8.
by fcvarela 10y ago
I don't think the spec meant to read that you must allow the client to be able to forge tokens by accepting tokens issued by it without an algo or signature. If you issue tokens with none, then you will have to accept them when clients
9.
by fcvarela 10y ago
"Send a header that specifies the "none" algorithm be used" Why would an issuer ever let a client decide what algo to use? "Send a header that specifies the "HS256" algorithm when the application normally