81–90 of 105 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seem completely unrelated to the goal of OP's library ?
It seems to be related to what a lot of people want and is low hanging fruit now that he has this library!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FYI, you can add browser support by using noble-hashes[1] for SHA256/HMAC - it's a well-done library, and gives you performance that is indistinguishable from native crypto on any scale relevant to S3 operations. We use it for our in-house S3 client. [1] https://github.com/paulmillr/noble-hashes
SHA256 and HMAC are widely available in the browser APIs: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/SubtleCrypt...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems to be related to what a lot of people want and is low hanging fruit now that he has this library!
You mean like https://github.com/s3fs-fuse/s3fs-fuse ? It‘s so old that even debian has precompiled packages ;)
But either one can only work with s3. His library works with many other backends. Get it? I'm saying he should consider integrating with goofys!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed but I was arguing about a general point. I'd be surprised if any of your Node projects had less than 100 total deps of which a large number will be maintained by a single person. See Express for example. 66 total deps with 26 deps relying on a single maintainer. https://npmgraph.js.org/?q=express But even in the case of the official aws-sdk they recently deprecated v2. I now need to update all my not-so-old No…
So let's put every package under the sun into the client? This approach does not scale. We should make NPM better.
BTW I'm not saying we should kill NPM. What I'm saying is we should reduce our dependance on random packages.
Bun doesn't need to add everything into the core engine. Eg: when using .NET you still add plenty of official Microsoft dependencies from Nuget.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> checksumming does make sense because it ensures that the file you've transferred is complete and what was expected. TCP has a checksum for packet loss, and TLS protects against MITM. I've always found this aspect of S3's design questionable. Sending both a content-md5 AND a x-amz-content-sha256 header and taking up gobs of compute in the process, sheesh... It's also part of the reason why running minio in its singl…
Well known (apparently not?) that applications can't rely on TCP checksums.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
checksumming does make sense because it ensures that the file you've transferred is complete and what was expected. if the checksum of the file you've downloaded differs from the server gave you, you should not process the file further and throw an error (worst case would probably be a man in the middle attack, not so worse cases being packet loss i guess)
You need the checksum only if the file is big and you're downloading it to disk, or if you're paranoid that some malware with root access might be altering the contents of your memory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I don't like AWS that much. I tried to set it up, but found it "terribly tedious" and drop the idea and instead focus on other platforms. Right now, I am testing/configuring Ceph ... but its open-source! Every talented weirdo with free time is welcomed to contribute!
Also try out Garage.
What's your experience running it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
checksumming does make sense because it ensures that the file you've transferred is complete and what was expected. if the checksum of the file you've downloaded differs from the server gave you, you should not process the file further and throw an error (worst case would probably be a man in the middle attack, not so worse cases being packet loss i guess)
TLS ensures that stream was not altered. Any further checksums are redundant.
What I would also love to see is a simple, single binary S3 server alternative to Minio. Maybe a small built in UI similar to DuckDB UI.