hlandau

44 ms·

421.
by hlandau 9y ago
Technically, you mean conhost.exe, not cmd.exe, but yes. cmd.exe is analogous to /bin/sh, not xterm.
422.
by hlandau 10y ago
Author engages in Transactional Coerced Endorsement in link at bottom of post ("paywithapost"; access gated on endorsement). What next, paywithanHNvote?
423.
by hlandau 10y ago
People are calling the old BIOS "PC BIOS" and UEFI "UEFI BIOS" nowadays. So feel free to continue to call it a BIOS.
424.
by hlandau 10y ago
Nope, a kitchen appliance retailer in the UK, a small business. The application was basically a CRM for storing records of customers and orders with a DOS or IBM-esque console UI. Blue background, context-sensitive function key legends prin
425.
by hlandau 10y ago
The most successful terminal system is the web browser, of course. It's not a conventional terminal, in the sense of a monospaced grid of characters, but the architecture is the same: server and client are separated, all "business
426.
by hlandau 10y ago
This is simply not true. If TLS fails, the vehicle used for code delivery has been compromised and can be used to deliver compromised code. Everything written in the article is only true if you assume that the code is delivered with its int
427.
by hlandau 10y ago
Yes, and the point of this is what, exactly?
428.
by hlandau 10y ago
I don't think so. If Google was only implementing DRM to tick boxes, they wouldn't be implementing "extracurriculars" like hardware-based DRM on ChromeOS devices. They wouldn't own the very DRM company whose product
429.
by hlandau 10y ago
Except this doesn't make sense. The set of clueless users who would install arbitrary malicious extensions and the set of clueless users who would download and run arbitrary executables is basically the same. Yet if they do the latter,
430.
by hlandau 10y ago
>The add-ons might be better, but XUL-based Firefox add-ons are not better. This statement is contradictory. >They essentially give full control of your computer to the developer of the add-on. There's no permission model. Yes. I
431.
by hlandau 10y ago
From what I've heard (I may be mistaken here), 2G/3G had pretty poor radio link security. This resulted, of course, in Stingrays. 4G supposedly has actually secure radio links; I think to the extent Stingrays work on these devices
432.
by hlandau 10y ago
I should note that I'm not an expert on this subject. According to the below, Airbus cockpit sidesticks have a red button on them. Pressing it disengages the autopilot if it's engaged, which is probably the more normal use. Pressi
433.
by hlandau 10y ago
There is. Google "sidestick priority".
434.
by hlandau 10y ago
That blog post insinuates that 'strict' HPKP wouldn't work, yet despite this Google Chrome actually enforces strict HPKP... but only for some Google Domains. It's rather a double standard. I wrote about this: https:&#x2
435.
by hlandau 10y ago
Yeah, I've considered client certificates for this very reason, but as you mention, the UI is truly awful. I'd like to see TLS Channel ID to become available in browsers for this very reason, but it still doesn't seem to have
436.
by hlandau 10y ago
Personally I'd be happy to DoS my sites by breaking them when policy MitM is used, as an act of solidarity. I even wrote a half-joking spec for it: https://hlandau.github.io/draft-landau-websec-key-pinning-re... Seems
437.
by hlandau 10y ago
Personally I like Go; it's a very fun language for me. It's true that it sometimes feels like a language designed for the precise purpose of writing daemons, but that's exactly why I like it. The thing about Go is that its op
438.
by hlandau 10y ago
I can't believe it took this long for someone to register that name.
439.
by hlandau 10y ago
Um, yes. And?
440.
by hlandau 10y ago
This presupposes that modification of a copy of a copyrighted work that one lawfully owns is, in itself (even without subsequent distribution), an act restricted by copyright. I contest this assertion. Even if it were the case, the permissi
441.
by hlandau 10y ago
This is very nice to see. I would note however that the use of the AGPL instead of the GPL here is probably legally meaningless. I wrote about this: https://www.devever.net/~hl/agplunenforceable
442.
by hlandau 10y ago
(This comment ended up turning into a blog post in itself, so I moved it: https://www.devever.net/~hl/e164 )
443.
by hlandau 10y ago
What exactly does it accomplish, though, in this instance? Since it's not real it can't actually authorize anything the site can't already do. It's a dubious approach, but it seems more misguided than actively malicious.
444.
by hlandau 10y ago
You can still do this as late as Win7. I think this was eliminated in Win8, but I've not used it myself. If you do use Aero, you can change the window chrome colour to something custom, which should catch out sites trying to fake windo
445.
by hlandau 10y ago
I'd note that Firefox now implements restrictive code signing practices with regard to extensions; in this regard, Firefox Developer Edition, which makes this a setting, might be a better choice than normally-branded Firefox builds.
446.
by hlandau 10y ago
If you're developing websites which are inoperative if the user agent does not support JavaScript, your development practices are broken. I browse without JavaScript by default, and if a page doesn't load properly because someone
447.
by hlandau 10y ago
I think I agree with Uber on this one. Self-driving functionality, at least for the time being, is a tool used by a human operator to achieve their objectives with regard to the vehicle. This is distinct from a vehicle with no driver, for w
448.
by hlandau 10y ago
They're by definition incompetently designed, as far as I'm concerned. Obviously this excludes anything which couldn't possibly work without JavaScript, like "Photoshop in your browser" or something. For pages of in
449.
by hlandau 10y ago
It's correct that these blobs are loaded way before GRUB or a Linux kernel gets booted. To be precise they are part of the firmware image; UEFI refers to a boot protocol specification. So for example with coreboot, you can select one o
450.
by hlandau 10y ago
The rate at which the complexity of the amd64 boot process is increasing is quite alarming. UEFI is an overcomplicated, buggy monstrosity, but that's just the tail end of the "boot process". Nowadays, to get an x86 CPU to exe

More ›