Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–216 of 216 posts

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#211

Post by mike-cardwell »

geggam wrote: post #172
mike-cardwell wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heared this too, but as far as I know it's only because there are potential bugs in the container software that allow the malware to escape. To me, this is kind of like saying you should just run stuff as root, because there might be a privelege escalation vulnerability which lets the code run as root anyway. Correct me if I'm wrong. My goal was to make things more secure, not completely secure. Previously, dodg…

A full VM seems somewhat of a better stance on this no ?

Only if you ignore why I'm doing this.

I could counter your "VM is better than container", with "Separate hardware is better than VM".

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#212

Post by dspillett »

mehrdadn wrote: post #184
dspillett wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One way to dedupe inline image resources while still using HTML rather than MHTML, could be to encode them in css once, and transform the image element to something with that class.

That'd easily break Javascript though.

Good point. I was thinking in the direction of something I'm tinkering with in a similar area. There getting a static snapshot of the current DOM or fragment is key (meaning scripts being stripped out is an intentional feature). Tweaking the document contents for efficiency could significantly impact a lot of script work that may be present.

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#213

Post by Huggernaut »

masklinn wrote: post #106
Huggernaut wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that's an extremely uncharitable view on containers. There has been a massive amount of work put into securing containers for a variety of use cases using both layers available and by adding to the kernel.

> I think that's an extremely uncharitable view on containers. It's an objective one. > There has been a massive amount of work put into securing containers for a variety of use cases using both layers available and by adding to the kernel. That doesn't change the fact that security was never the primary goal for containers, so secure containers were and are a bunch of tricks, kludges and prayers being built up in th…

It is not objective by any stretch of the imagination.

I suppose when security enhancements are made to any other system to make them safer (i.e. everything in the realm of security), you apply the same logic? Subjective.

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#214

Post by Huggernaut »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #194
roblabla wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please quote how containers are not built with security in mind? What would even be the point of user namespacing, network namespaces, filesystem namespaces, etc... if not security?

Look at how the cloud providers offer support for containers. Do they ever offer to run your container in the same VM as those of other customers? They never do this. For secure isolation, they only trust VM isolation. It seems unlikely that this will change. > What would even be the point of user namespacing, network namespaces, filesystem namespaces, etc... if not security? They're for installation/configuration/ad…

There are many services that run applications colocated on VMs in containers.

I don't disagree they are leakier abstractions but they can still satisfy a wide variety of workload security needs.

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#215

Post by dspillett »

ur-whale wrote: post #189
flatroze wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you please open issue on github providing the output that you get in the terminal?

I have closed my github account since the takeover occured.

The important part of what he said was "providing the output that you get in the terminal". Simply stating "I got an error" and expecting the developer(s) to use clairvoyance to glean further detail is far from a helpful way to report a problem. Perhaps dropping the details in a pastebin site and linking to that would be a possible alternative? Or just including the error message here if it is short enough, though HN shouldn't really be used as a tech support channel.

Re: Show HN: CLI tool for saving web pages as a single file

#216

Post by lucasverra »

gildas wrote: post #135
chiefalchemist wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it also capture tracking crap? Wouldn't it be great to grab a URL via CL and read it local without anyone knowing? If it does capture the tracking shite, would disconnecting from the internet be a good enough blocker?

By default, it will capture everything that would be interpreted/displayed. However, you can also run it with Selenium (and Firefox) instead of Puppeteer, and install your favorite extensions to block all the unwanted resources (there's a switch for that).

Puppeteer and FF will be a thing officialy by Chromium https://github.com/GoogleChrome/puppeteer/tree/master/experi...
Post reply on HN