Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds like it could be intentional. — We bought .dev, now what we do with all those people in the wild misusing it? — Well, most of them misuse it with our browser, let's break at least their hacks early and loudly.
It was unintentional. Source: The horse's mouth. I'm the guy who came up with the idea of launching .dev and .app as HTTPS-only TLDs, and I'm the one who had them added to the HSTS preload list.
foo@bar.com
51–60 of 301 posts
Re: foo@bar.com
#52Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved
A lot of people learned this the hard way when Google bought and later enabled permanent HSTS for the .dev domain (prior to actually publicly releasing it) in Chrome, breaking everybody's non https local .dev environments. As mentioned above, it should have been .test
Re: foo@bar.com
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was unintentional. Source: The horse's mouth. I'm the guy who came up with the idea of launching .dev and .app as HTTPS-only TLDs, and I'm the one who had them added to the HSTS preload list.
Out of interest, how did this happen without any investigation into possible consequences etc? It’s a huge change that surely warranted special attention before making it happen?
So yes, we didn't anticipate how many people weren't following the best practices, but that would have been hard to determine prior to doing the thing anyway. There were also lots of people who had the mindset of "We won't change anything until it stops working", so in some sense a lot of it was unavoidable. See e.g.: https://github.com/laravel/valet/issues/204 https://github.com/laravel/valet/issues/294 https://github.com/laravel/valet/issues/431 (note that Laravel users were responsible for a non-trivial fraction of the total problems experienced, and that we only discovered all this post-HSTS-preloading). The problem was repeatedly pointed out and the maintainers refused to fix it until it actually broke. So, inevitably, it broke, and then they fixed it.
Re: foo@bar.com
#54Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved
Re: foo@bar.com
#55Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved
A lot of people learned this the hard way when Google bought and later enabled permanent HSTS for the .dev domain (prior to actually publicly releasing it) in Chrome, breaking everybody's non https local .dev environments. As mentioned above, it should have been .test
Re: foo@bar.com
#56So fuck 'em, it doesn't matter.
Re: foo@bar.com
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was unintentional. Source: The horse's mouth. I'm the guy who came up with the idea of launching .dev and .app as HTTPS-only TLDs, and I'm the one who had them added to the HSTS preload list.
Out of interest, how did this happen without any investigation into possible consequences etc? It’s a huge change that surely warranted special attention before making it happen?
Re: foo@bar.com
#58Re: foo@bar.com
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also have Microsoft's list of domains / companies used in their documentation and examples: https://social.technet.microsoft.com/wiki/contents/articles/...
That’s really cool. Contoso (also mentioned by someone else in this thread) and Fabrikam are the only ones I remembered off the top of my head, I had no idea they used that many.
Re: foo@bar.com
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://foobar.withgoogle.com/
Thanks. bar.foo should really be redirecting there ... I'll look into it.
The element never reappeared again.
I always wondered why the element appeared on the page. Obviously because "some combination of factors" ultimately returned true - I mean specifically why :)