hlandau

51 ms·

481.
by hlandau 11y ago
Nope. https://www.devever.net/~hl/agplunenforceable
482.
by hlandau 11y ago
Probably not legal, but somebody actually made a faithful fan remake of Maniac Mansion called Maniac Mansion Deluxe. http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/site/games/game/401/
483.
by hlandau 11y ago
See the provisions for technical capability notices. I covered the draft version here: https://www.devever.net/~hl/investigatorypowers
484.
by hlandau 11y ago
Use your imagination. The key tool in the box, I think, is to give people orders that you expressly state can't be later revoked. You can use this to construct something like the human equivalent of an HSM. (An HSM, after all, is somet
485.
by hlandau 11y ago
The key issue, I think, is not what law-theoretically does and does not theoretically oblige you to comply with a jurisdiction, but the assets and people which are within reaching distance of the applicable government. Whether a service is
486.
by hlandau 11y ago
I'd take the odds on this. The number of people charged with failing to comply with a s. 49 notice is low (much lower than the number issued with them and whom don't comply). The number of people successfully charged is lower stil
487.
by hlandau 11y ago
Indeed. Code signing is a perfectly valid technique, and useful, but device owners must be able to control the root of trust. It's when code signing is used to create a system of manufacturer, rather than device owner control that is t
488.
Why I will never use Windows 8/10(devever.net)
7 points by hlandau 11y ago|8 comments
489.
by hlandau 11y ago
I've done some thinking on what makes sense and ended up at this very rough first sketch. Comments welcome. https://gist.github.com/hlandau/ed6a96150c69945143be
490.
by hlandau 11y ago
I can't use the exit code, because a nonzero exit code by UNIX convention indicates failure, which will spam people in their cron jobs. There's only one exit code which conventionally means 'success'. I could modify acme
491.
by hlandau 11y ago
I'm the author of acmetool. It's quite interesting to know that people are using the design to its full potential. Ideally, I should probably make something more library/daemon-based for these largescale, custom solutions, th
492.
by hlandau 11y ago
Look, I use x86 CPUs. I don't have much choice in the matter. But frankly, this stuff needs to be tracked, because there's too much of it to keep in my brain anymore, and if you look at Intel CPUs in particular, the level of malev
493.
by hlandau 11y ago
I should note that if you just want to get the number of arguments for a call to a varargs function rather than trust people to terminate the arguments with NULL properly, you can do this with the C99 preprocessor: #define foo(...) foo(PP_N
494.
by hlandau 11y ago
I think you really don't get the point of the article. This kind of crazy overcomplexity seems like one of the many things the article author would lump into excessive complexity for the sake of complexity. Yes you can implement a REST
495.
by hlandau 11y ago
Indeed. I have used Adblock and Noscript for years. My browsing the web is not an invitation for websites to serve a webpage viewing webapp so that they can (poorly, buggily, in a more error-prone manner) reimplement a browser's naviga
496.
by hlandau 11y ago
The problem is not all systems are *nix. Windows doesn't enforce the <1024 port restriction. The advantage of using port 443 I suppose is that it's so commonly used it'll probably (maybe) be tied up with one service or ano
497.
by hlandau 11y ago
I've suggested this on the ACME list, actually; allowing people to put their ACME account public keys in DNS, rather than the random-per-transaction challenge specified right now, which is quasi-unusable. The problem, apparently, is th
498.
by hlandau 11y ago
There's been a lot of discussion about this on the IETF ACME mailing list. Essentially, the issue is that certificates don't nominate a specific port, so if you can get a certificate for a hostname you can impersonate any service
499.
by hlandau 11y ago
I'm not familiar with Azure. But assuming you're running ASP.NET on Windows, no. Windows support is explicitly not an objective of this client; I designed it to fit well in a UNIX system. There are probably issues with filesystem
500.
by hlandau 11y ago
Some people don't want to run a client as root because they don't want to increase their attack surface or don't trust the software to that extent. The purpose of the non-root manual is to allow people to take understandable
501.
Show HN: ACME Let's Encrypt client – binary releases, works like 'make'(github.com)
73 points by hlandau 11y ago|0 comments
502.
by hlandau 11y ago
I'm the nth author of an ACME (Let's Encrypt) client. It's a single-binary Go client which you can build and upload to your server. It's designed to work like "make"; you tell it what hostnames you want certifi
503.
On Kazakhstan TLS MitM, HTTPS Pinning and Google Hypocrisy(devever.net)
2 points by hlandau 11y ago|0 comments
504.
by hlandau 12y ago
There are a few issues here. SDO, CSDE: Firstly, some platforms are too short to fit all of the doors on, especially with the lengths of trains being extended. Thus at some platforms it is necessary to ensure that the first or last doors of