Viewing profile — unscaled
unscaled
HN member- Joined
- Wed, Jan 07, 2015, 5:33 PM UTC
- HN karma
- 2,526
- Public activity
- 681 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About unscaled
No profile information was provided.
Recent public activity
-
comment
Comment #49169906
I don't think it was true even in 2023. This sounds like tackling the problems of C++ in the early 2000s. 1. Casey Muratori also that DRY shouldn't doesn't have to result in non-pe…
-
comment
Comment #49078645
For this testing to be really effective at stopping "dangerous and misaligned" models from leaking out, you need a mechanism for banning failed models that prevent them from being …
-
comment
Comment #49065292
The law is airtight. Acceptance must be informed and freely given (this includes forcing through dark patterns and annoying banners that force you not to read), and withdrawal shou…
-
comment
Comment #49065208
Despite this being called a "cookie banner", this is not _just_ about cookie. When you click "Accept all" you are giving your consent to any form of tracking and information sharin…
-
comment
Comment #49012379
It doesn't even have to be something as bare-bones as pass. You can have a full-fledged password manager that is open-source and local-first. KeepassXC (and the OG Keepass) were al…
-
comment
Comment #49012248
"supposed" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting here. According to who? The FIDO2 or Webauthn standards? Or in a perfect world? FIDO 1.0 started as two different standards: UAF and U2F.…
-
comment
Comment #49012138
Passkeys is basically a brand name for "discoverable credentials" (a Webauthn term). They do a little more than that technically, but in practice their purpose is what you said. Re…
-
comment
Comment #49011929
The FIDO set of standards (UAF, U2F which predated passwords and passkeys) haven't even started as enterprise standards. There are multiple origins for what became FIDO, but the ma…
-
comment
Comment #48618702
For what? For just authenticating a client application to a server without getting access to any user data? By all means. You usually don't need the client credentials in OAuth 2.0…
-
comment
Comment #48570957
PKCE, OAuth 2.0 for Native Apps and the Device Code flow are a thing. In practice all of these clients work so well with OAuth 2.0, that the implicit and resource owner password cr…
-
comment
Comment #48570896
I wish I was young. Did I explicitly said TLS __1.3__ or did I not? A lot of effort was put into making TLS 1.3 a stronger, less agile and more misuse-resistant standard than its p…
-
comment
Comment #48567739
True. But XSS stealing your token (which is always possible with localStorage) is still worse than XSS using your token. It's the principle of least privilege all over again.
-
comment
Comment #48567727
The main reason I don't like the id token is that I've seen way too many instances of the ID token being used as a trusted identity assertion sent across multiple services or to th…
-
comment
Comment #48567688
The OP was talking about sessions (which include session cookies and API tokens). I'd argue these use cases are far more common for the average programmer than tokens and signature…
-
comment
Comment #48567603
PASETO and TLS 1.3 were also written by humans. TLS libraries (which are several orders of magnitude more complicated than JWT libraries) are also written by humans. If you passion…
-
comment
Comment #48567582
If memory serves me right, cookies were designed by Netscape in 1994 before JavaScript was even a thing. They were released in an early beta of Netscape (0.9 something), while Java…
-
comment
Comment #48567258
Wow, Fortune 500 companies are using an insecure technology, get hacked and exploited by cryptominers and PII burglars and then just patch their vulnerabilities and call it a day? …
-
comment
Comment #48567189
A non-exhuastive list of CVEs from this year alone: CVE-2026-28802, CVE-2026-29000, CVE-2026-1529, CVE-2026-22817/8, CVE-2026-34950, CVE-2026-23993, CVE-2026-32597. Most of them ar…
-
comment
Comment #48567169
JWT libraries had poor defaults because the spec was poorly designed. Of course JWT can be implemented securely. Even XMLDSig can be implemented securely. But if the spec is not de…
-
comment
Comment #48566821
I think both you and GP are somewhat misrepresenting the OP is saying. OP's argument is three-fold: 1. JWTs are not a good fit for a session token (although there are several RFCs …
-
comment
Comment #48408935
Ok, I think I misunderstood you. Lightweight policing, not policy. I guess this happens in the US, but in most countries cops wouldn't stop you for a traffic violation with a gun i…
-
comment
Comment #48408611
That's interesting. I didn't know any other country in East Asia that showed this level of restrictive policy that sets up a cascade of problematic tooling and technologies. Japane…
-
comment
Comment #48408517
I don't think it's a dystopia. Hanlon's razor still applies. But I beg to differ on your classification of North Korean policies as "lightweight". Korean internet policies usually …
-
comment
Comment #48408264
This sounds to me like a repeat of what happened with SEED[1]. The recipe is the same: a real problem followed by a hasty (and probably inferior) NIH solution, a single implementat…
-
comment
Comment #48250405
> It's not "JWT is broken". The cryptography is fine. The tymondesigns/jwt-auth package is fine. The concept of using JWT as your app's session is what's broken. If only that was t…