staticassertion

212 ms·

1. 4531.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   If I visit website A it should not know that I also visited website B. HTTP or HTTPS is irrelevant - they are totally separate connections and this does not assume anyone is in the middle. Of course, there are attacks that already work us
2. 4532.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   I've written 1 to 1 (algorithm) code from Python to Rust and seen orders of magnitude performance/ memory difference. This was not a 'rewrite it with lessons learned' this was 'rewrite it as similarly as possible&#x
3. 4533.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   I didn't realize you were recommending to use sel4, I assumed you meant they should have proven theirs using similar methods.
4. 4534.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   I'm only commenting on seL4's approach not being very viable. I'm not advocating for C++ in the kernel either.
5. 4535.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   I wouldn't use SEL4 as an argument. It is completely unreasonable to build a production kernel the way they did - it took them ages to get what they had. Google is probably looking to develop features/ move code a lot faster tha
6. 4536.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   > Writing unsafe Rust instead of unsafe C is not giving you any real advantage for the existing projects, as long as the state is as it is. Your argument hinges pretty heavily on this. It's incorrect. The reality is that unsafe code
7. 4537.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   > The good news is that I joined Cloudflare two weeks ago, who is a big Cap'n Proto user, and it looks like I'll have more time and justification to do releases there That's great news, thanks for the disclaimer/ info
8. 4538.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   The quote wasn't really about null - that's just the talk he was giving. It was about checked array indexing. I would also say there really is no comparison between null, which escapes typechecking, and unwrap, which does not. But
9. 4539.▲
   by staticassertion 10y ago

   " ... a programming language designer should be responsible for the mistakes that are made by the programmers using the language. [...] It's very easy to persuade the customers of your language that everything that goes wrong is t
10. 4540.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    OK, I should have said garbage collector, not runtime.
11. 4541.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    As far as I am aware Ada is not memory safe without a runtime and with the presence of non-static memory. So you either have a runtime, no deallocation, or unsafety.
12. 4542.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    That's a pretty impressive response - committing to fuzzing with AFL, improving current fuzzing test coverage, adding new coding guidelines, and a paid security audit. In regards to 4 (valgrind) perhaps utilizing other sanitizers would
13. 4543.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Who said anything about CPU? Slack's going to make DNS requests, multiple TCP requests most likely. That's network IO, multiple orders of magnitude slower than reading from disk - which is (at most, it may just read small file fro
14. 4544.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    > What's Slack doing compared to a full (if primitive) OS and userland? Connecting to the internet.
15. 4545.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Microservices do not feel like a premature optimization. It does not feel premature to make architectural decisions around scaling based on the entirely realistic proposition that you will have more customers in the future than you do today
16. 4546.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    I'm sure it happens - my point is that it isn't relevant to microservices. Microservices allow multiple technology stacks, if dont properly, but it doesn't force it on anyone. If your developers are pushing code using a diffe
17. 4547.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Polyglot programming isn't "a fad" - it's something that microservices enable. That does not mean that developers make technical decisions in isolation. If I were to introduce Haskell to my company there would have to
18. 4548.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    This is a totally nutty scenario. Microservices are not "do whatever you want!" - they give you the freedom to choose your stack. It is obviously still a business decision to choose Haskell and you've got other problems if
19. 4549.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Yeah, the two weak points pointed out have always been weak points. It's unfortunate, but disabling autofill has always been my recommendation. > Altogether it looks like LastPass is a lot better at PR than they are at security. Y
20. 4550.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    > If.you have another metric please offer it. Evaluating the security of a product is a fairly rigorous task with no clear, objective 'this one is strictly more secure' outcome possible. > I have no reason to believe the m
21. 4551.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Thunks are values that have yet to be evaluated. For example '3 + 3' could be represented as a thunk, and there's no cost other than memory because you have not computed '6'. So you're skipping the cost of comp
22. 4552.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    I didn't really understand what your question was, it sounded as if you were trying to imply the reason yourself. I do not work for Microsoft, I have no insight into their decision making process. I doubt it has to do with security.
23. 4553.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    > Saying 'you should have rewritten this in rust in order to avoid liability' is not a standard of care that anybody will ever be held to. Why is 'you should not have exposed C code to the internet' an unreasonable ba
24. 4554.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    My point is that not all bugs lead to data loss or loss of privacy. But yes, I agree. That said, I feel that we're now talking about memory safety vs semantic safety. We can certainly prove a program is entirely memory safe. Rust'
25. 4555.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    > I totally agree with that and have been a long time proponent of liability for damage caused by software bugs. But that would have to be all bugs, not just some classes of bugs. Why? That goes against everything we've done to cate
26. 4556.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    This seems like a strawman. "Rust prevents these bugs", "Oh, but Rust doesn't prevent all bugs!".
27. 4557.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    > There are safer, better alternatives for almost everything we do. But economy dictates that we end up with a compromise. Rust would be just another compromise, slightly different stage, no huge difference and potentially a huge cost. I
28. 4558.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    There are many, many factors that need to be taken into account when asking "will this technology succeed" and only one of those factors is "is the technology good/ better than what exists now". Familiarity is a hug
29. 4559.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    You think that Edge is closed source to avoid more bugs being found, but Microsoft also pays 3rd party developers for finding bugs in Edge?
30. 4560.▲
    by staticassertion 10y ago

    Being critical and pursuing the issue is one thing. You can find lots of work on formally verifying rust code as well as it's type safety online.