Viewing profile — joev_
joev_
HN member- Joined
- Wed, Dec 11, 2013, 5:00 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 134
- Public activity
- 37 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About joev_
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #11304995
I seem to remember trying this (passing {scope:'/'} in the register call), and it doesn't work. Some googling seems to agree: "Service Workers are restricted by the path of the Ser…
-
comment
Comment #11302911
ServiceWorkers are scoped to the basename of the path they are served from, so you could only intercept a small subset of all possible CDN URLs. In the example, this would be resou…
-
comment
Comment #11212352
I mucked with this a while back. You can dump all your passwords over the websocket pretty easily (provided your 1password is unlocked): https://gist.github.com/joevennix/438782cbe…
-
comment
Comment #8875803
Out of curiosity, did you actually replace the Browser app, or did you just install a new one? If the stock Browser is still installed, you may consider the fact that it can probab…
-
comment
Comment #8742809
> If I want to style my button, I set some properties on the button. You cannot be serious. A 1000+ line long setup() method that creates a ton of one-off elements, sets a million …
-
comment
Comment #8732754
> Yes, there is more memory available than before, but that doesn't mean we should just waste it for useless stuff. I disagree. I think the point is that it's not useless, by its o…
-
comment
Comment #8703013
Obligatory: http://jsfiddle.net/jrxvw1yd/ Compiled through emscripten to build a JS interpreter in a browser... at only 1.5MB!
-
comment
Comment #8643872
> Apple wants to relegate websites to second-class status on their popular computers, and exercises viewpoint censorship on what “apps” they allow in their “app store”. I don't rem…
-
comment
Comment #8631335
Can you list some native UI controls that you'd like to use but can't recreate in HTML? I am writing a similar framework and would like to know the use-cases for doing this. Edit: …
-
comment
Comment #8363463
/bin/sh depends on the system. It might be busybox or a minimal shell (this is common on embedded devices). On some systems like OSX and I think CentOS /bin/sh is just bash. You ca…
-
comment
Comment #8327831
My understanding is that Chrome replaced Webkit in WebView's internal implementation in 4.4, so the bug should never appear in 4.4.
-
comment
Comment #8322813
I didn't test back this far; I should have, it's about 10% of android users. I tested back to 4.0 (not that 4.0-4.1.2 being vulnerable matters much, since you can get remote code e…
-
comment
Comment #8322427
I don't know the exact location, but it is probably somewhere in the webview tree, since it affects apps that embed webviews as well: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/fram…
-
comment
Comment #8322118
I wish I had tested this sooner, but yes, Webview is vulnerable (use document.write(document.domain) instead of alert() to test). So afaict apps that embed webview/ads on < 4.4 are…
-
comment
Comment #8321857
Actually X-Frame-Options does not save you here. There is a BYPASS_XFO datastore option in the module that turns this into a one-click exploit. This allows the attack to work again…
-
comment
Comment #8287826
> I guess as a developer you would be using Canary Chrome vs. Nightly Firefox, to get the latest Not always. As a developer I use the latest stable Firefox, since that's what I can…
-
comment
Comment #7934303
Wow, this just makes me love America's Test Kitchen even harder. Edit: and it's served from a statically-generated jekyll blog that is on their github page. Did I mention they have…
-
comment
Comment #7883381
To be fair, there is a large disclaimer: > I'd like to start this post with a disclaimer: I don't know much about creating accessible websites.
-
comment
Comment #7880289
It's still a much, much safer model than Firefox's Add-ons.
-
comment
Comment #7862362
http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/clickit/
-
comment
Comment #7860557
Unfortunately x-frame-options does not always fix these kinds of problems. If you can get the user to click more than once on your page, you can open a tab in the background on the…
-
comment
Comment #7855424
Heh. I clicked a few before I realized what was going on (looking at the status bar shows the link, which somewhat gives it away). You could prevent this by adding mouseover/out an…
-
comment
Comment #7541573
Nah, you just set target="iframe name" on the form and post into a (hidden) iframe. Then in 2 seconds you redirect to LinkedIn. In my experience, getting clicks from targets is eas…
-
comment
Comment #7539314
Not really. Depending on the protocol CSRFs are often an easy 1-click exploit on noscript-enabled browsers. Something like this: " /> Is the corresponding 1-click that works on nos…
-
comment
Comment #7499032
There is no advantage. In fact, it's more annoying when you're debugging, since you don't get the fn name in the trace.