Earlier quoted context omitted.
Close. hunter2
What? I just see stars
Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
201–210 of 344 posts
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
(sticking with the obliviousness for a moment,) Would they need to store the plaintext password? Hashing every word typed isn't efficient but it's possible to achieve without knowing the plaintext. It reminds me of Facebook allowing login even when you've mistyped your password: https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/214814/why-can-...
> Hashing every word typed Wouldn’t work if your password contains spaces.
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if it's a static HTML, you need to patch your webserver, OS, and migrate the whole stack to newer versions. This is why I'm scaling down my home infrastructure to SBCs and run everything on Debian with stock package repositories. It reduces tons of burden to something very manageable.
"Even if it's just static text, you need to patch your OS, update your text editor and migrate the whole document to newer versions." Nah. That's bull. A static site can be put on a web server and the site never needs to be updated again. I have web sites people started hosting on my servers in the '90s that are still there, still serving, and haven't been touched in twenty years. Sure, I update the servers and softw…
I think this is what I said? Quoting myself:
> Even if it's a static HTML, you need to patch your webserver, OS, and migrate the whole stack to newer versions.
I don't think I said "you need to update/patch the webpage itself".
Huh. The password masking algorithm changes some words possibly.
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#204Goodbye!
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Even if it's just static text, you need to patch your OS, update your text editor and migrate the whole document to newer versions." Nah. That's bull. A static site can be put on a web server and the site never needs to be updated again. I have web sites people started hosting on my servers in the '90s that are still there, still serving, and haven't been touched in twenty years. Sure, I update the servers and softw…
Someone has to run the server. That's the point.
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#206Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
What does age have to do with it? "Turn that frown upside down" isn't a phrase that would make much sense to people who didn't hear it before. More so if English isn't their first language or they are neurodivergent. I don't believe I have ever heard this phrase used IRL. It's not a very nice thing to say in most contexts (saying this to another adult is outright bad - which is what makes the IRC joke funny in the fi…
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#208Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#209Most recently, I was using bash.org as my go-to non-HTTPS site for captive portal purposes (back when HTTPS Everywhere was a useful extensions). But the built-into-Firefox HTTPS only treatment handles captive portals gracefully already, so I didn't actually visit in a while. Goodbye!
Re: Tell HN: Bash.org is no more
#210What a shame. IRC is one of the few protocols left of the early Internet that hasn't been aggressively commercialized and colonized by corporate interests, and this is just another nail in the coffin. Often times I wonder why basically _everything_ must be on the Web, and if all that historical baggage and complexity is really necessary, or even worth it at all.