Live data from Hacker News

AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

asmbb.org

81–90 of 131 posts

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#81
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coming from leading response time initiatives at a Big Tech, ouch. 1s is painful. Obviously transit time is a big part of that but if that's considered "good", well oof.

Well your average big tech site might transfer in a fraction of that, but then spends >5 seconds running JavaScript before anything useful happens.

What, are you implying that staring at grey circle and square placeholders for 15 seconds isn't good user experience? That's crazy talk!

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#82
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but it's a tricky time to point that out. Right now we'd have to boycott a large proportion of open source projects by Israeli and Arab/Iranian/etc authors if we wanted to avoid using any open source software written by people who support obscene and inhumane military actions.

I don’t think there is any point in boycotting open-source software written by those people? If it was actually their source of income, then it might do something, but it’s already freely available.

It influences the personal psychological state of people to see that they're being ostracized, especially if they are not accustomed to it, and hence statistically will lead some to some impact on the balance of public opinion and state positions via democratic and societal network mechanisms. I think that it's helpful to ensure that all Israeli authors understand that the majority of the western world is no longer prepared to excuse their country's barbarity, to the extent that they will shun projects by citizens. It may have less impact on Arab/Iranian etc supporters of radical anti-Israel military actions because they are already accustomed to being ostracized by the west.

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#84
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, from that perspective every backend web application in every language is really just "calling C code".

That's overly simplistic and untrue. If you write a C# / .Net program you're not "just calling C code", you're not calling C at all.

But the CLR is written c, c++ and assembly which is what runs c#. Also the syscalls that run down the chain are also written in c, c++ etc.

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OpenSSL, for example, was hit with quite a few serious bugs over the years, and I'd still choose using it than my own SSL implementation. Especially in assembly. That's the difference between a programmer and a real engineer: an engineer doesn't need any help from dependencies to make his code totally insecure.

Engineers do design, implementation is the job of the technician or machinist or somebody like that. If the engineer’s code ends up shipped to customers, something very strange has happened.

In my world architects design, engineers provide feedback and implement stuff

First time I hear about technicians writing code.

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#86
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; dependencies are more of a liability than anything else.

Do you really want to implement http, ssl and tls; all by your self, what about security hash algorithms? Re inventing the wheel means you also get to go through all the bugs and s purity issue that these open source libraries went through. This is a type of opinion I would expect some one with no understanding about security saying.

Assuming you do have enough understanding of secure programming, you can actually forgo most dependencies if you really want. You can ignore most edge cases which have to be implemented if you exactly follow the standard (e.g. HTTP parsing rules), supporting only one ciphersuite that is known to be safe and widely used, and so on. Of course that still doesn't justify the use of assembly.

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#89
post #37

This is super cool, though I very much doubt the following statement: > AsmBB is very secure web application, because of the internal design and the reduced dependencies. There's a lot of value in using well tested dependencies, and even Chuck Norris will have bugs writing complex software in assembly. Especially when doing string manipulation which this project should be doing a lot of.

i agree that assembly is more bug-prone than other languages, but things like internal design and dependencies make a bigger difference. if all your strings are managed with your custom library for dynamically allocated strings, you probably aren't going to have any string buffer overflows because there are only like three places where you could get it wrong. on the other hand, if you're bringing in megabytes of libc code full of string handling, there's lots of potential for bugs

in this case, though, they're linking with sqlite, so all that is out the window

as far as i know, though it's a lot simpler than asmbb, httpdito doesn't have any security holes: http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/server.s http://canonical.org/~kragen/sw/dev3/httpdito-readme

as 10000truths points out in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38985198, in assembly you don't have to deal with undefined behavior, and that helps a lot. occasionally you have behavior that varies by implementations, but there's no nasal demons, and in particular you can add two unknown integers without even hitting implementation-defined behavior. and, in theory, you can never guarantee that a c program won't overflow its stack, and i've had this happen in practice on arduino, where it collided with the heap. and signedness bugs (which are commonly security holes; even qmail had one) are plausibly easier to avoid in assembly than in c, though recent compiler versions help with that

Re: AsmBB – a lightweight web forum engine written in assembly language

#90
post #65

“In addition it supports Unicode Emoji characters in really native way.” I wish it would go into greater detail here. I’m unclear what “really native” implies, as opposed to some sort of “kind of native” way?

Just spit balling here: some sites like Twitter have their own emoji sets and I wonder if they're saying that they don't do that and instead rely on the OS's normal rendering of emojis.

Dunno, asmBB also uses an emoji font set.
Post reply on HN