31–40 of 77 posts
Posthog's website design feels like a joke that went a bit too far
Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Other than the silly design, the website's cookie banner is actively malicious. It proclaims to be legally required and directly blames the President of the European Commission. If Posthog is being truthful about its cookie usage, the cookie banner is in fact not legally required. Consent banners are only required if you're trying to do individual user tracking or collecting personally identifying data; technical coo…
I don't have a cookie banner on _my_ website for exactly this reason, but I have to admit some people have asked my if it isn't suspicious that I don't. Perhaps that's what they're trying to avoid here? (that would be the positive reading)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a cookie banner on _my_ website for exactly this reason, but I have to admit some people have asked my if it isn't suspicious that I don't. Perhaps that's what they're trying to avoid here? (that would be the positive reading)
Maybe you need a "why I don't have a banner" banner.
or maybe I just missed your sarcasm
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
In this case, I think GP is suggesting this rises above the level of a tangential annoyance .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
In this case, I think GP is suggesting this rises above the level of a tangential annoyance .
I didn’t know what Posthog was before this event but the website is so unusable on Safari on MacOS or iOS for me i’m surprised I stuck through to discover the product.
Without JavaScript, all I get is a background image and a top "navigation bar" where the only thing that's actually operable at all is a signup link. Which then goes to a completely blank page. I still don't know what Posthog is, but I'm now committed to never using it if I can at all help it.
I’m apparently also not in their market so, the best I ca say from the website is (hand wavy) “website analytics”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, I think GP is suggesting this rises above the level of a tangential annoyance .
Also HN doesn't need 11 month old volunteer mods.
Pre-coffee, apparently.
This is a great writeup, kudos for the PostHog folks. Curious: would you be able to make your original exploitable workflow available for analysis? You note that a static analysis tool flagged it as potentially exploitable, but that the finding was suppressed under the belief that it was a false positive. I'm curious if there are additional indicators the tool could have detected that would have reduced the likelihoo…