Except it doesn't, server side code is more universal.
I strongly disagree.
In server side there is vast amount of different software stacks build
top of C library and they are incompatible. Running PHP code top of
Java stack just doesn't work.
In client side, there has ongoing for several
Yes, my goal is to secure the
infrastructure as much as possible.
I don't know details but it sounds overly complex. And complexity
may cause other issues, without any benefit for security.
Example, you don't have to encrypt your whole hard disk if the hard
disk is located in guarded bunker. But
however it *is* realistic and reasonable to *limit*
the cross-site JS code that is only there for the use of other third
parties.
I agree. I filter too crap away. Javascript itself is not problem.
But none of them require javascript to function.
Node.js
What is not a good thing is to have just one standard. That's never
good.
And this is current status. Apple, Canonical, Google and Microsoft
pushing their own competing front end ecosystems. And there is still
HTML/JS which is portable.
You mean, there is _legislation_ on how to write software?
Some industries, yes. But this is not related to JS.
Practically whole IT-industry supports JS. If you like to do portable
application programming, you have to write JS or compile your
code to JS if you want to get that working
If any of these end up being better than JS,
I don't see any reason not to use them.
I think everyone of these are better if you don't care about portability.
I prefer to use a desktop application for those instead
of running them from my browser. Just saying.
There isn't much new desktop
but at the same time using the conversation to hurt people trying to
build something simpler.
It is not meant to hurt anyone.
Optimal complexity is when there is nothing you like to add and nothing
you like to remove.
It is just that sometimes happens event called disruptive innovation.
When
next I convince you that JS is good.
I said that it crappy, but it happens that crap gets adopted standard.
It just happens, it has happened before and when the shit works and
solve compatibility issues by having adopted standard, it is useful.
What can I do for that?!
It is problem in
You are on the wrong list.
Ok. I will unscribe myself for.. eternity. Because
I obviously have hurt feelings. Especially yours, Theo.
I did not intentionally do that. And I have _never_ bashed
you. And I actually never got what makes you so upset.
I'm enthusiast to tech without religion.
1. OpenBSD is a great example of the difference that having security as
a primary design and development objective makes, unlike most other
OSes (including all flavors of linux) which do added security.
Yes, primary objective. Definitely.
It is also form of added security, because it is based on
Many a naïve person believe you can add security as an afterthought
but I'm not aware of this approach ever truly succeeding.
I think that OpenBSD has done decent job. Decades ago that old unix
code, originally did not quite exactly been EAL7.
Why should I enable javascript to obtain basic information about a
website?
Why do not keep Javascript all time enabled?
Keeping Javascript disabled is like disabling programmability from
shell. What is the idea?
I can't know what interest openbsdeurope has in requiring users to
enable JS to obtain any information from their website.
Probably 999 users in thousand doesn't want to make web crippled and
doesn't even think that standard JS is any special requirement.
*I* choose what programs my shell
If the javascript contains an XMLHTTPRequest object, it can call out
to a different server (than the one you are visiting) without your
explicit knowledge, download content, and do basically whatever the
user the browser is running as can do,
I'm aware. This object is in practice transformed
So you are saying that soon everything will be force fed to you and
you will be ok with it?
There are two things which irritates me in computing:
1. Need of security updates
2. Two pieces of technology which are not compatible with each other.
I'm GLAD that finally we have Javascript. At
and navigation of a site should not require javascript as
per w3c guidelines.
The thing is that web is more than web sites. It is also full of
applications and these are totally mixed.
However considering OpenBSD users are security savvy and should
understand the potential risks of random sites
Thumbs up!
...but I will never trust it or use it for security critical purposes.
Me neither. Google itself is a security hole. Stasi would love it :)
My point was that application model, everything running on sandbox,
most of the applications running on bytecode machine with bounds
checking..
Why would someone want to bring the SDK for that junk on OpenBSD platform?
Why not? What do you lose if someone bring that?
I don't think that there is not many operating systems, especially
open source licenses, putting effort to proactive security. Android is
one of the few.
In fact, Android
I'll have to disappoint you but I don't have any side.
I'm pretty much agnostic and interested all kind of technology.
But if we talk on methods to make platform secure, don't you agree that
folks on Google have put effort to make Android hard to exploit?
Criminals, at least go on where the
I ask here because I don't want to pollute tech@,
you told about those dangerous idioms, is that all knowledge collected
anywhere? Even I know a lot of secure coding practices, I that would be
interesting to read.
And question comes to my mind.. Is there attempts to use this knowledge
in
Hi,
I don't think that any web developer care OpenBSD because OpenBSD
doesn't have graphical browser in base system. They don't care even if
1000 OpenBSD users complain.
Flash material will disappear from web less than three years and Flash
videos will get replaced by Mpeg-4 AVC and WebM.
I
Hello,
man page says:
signal - simplified software signal facilities
And the interfaces differs a lot from this:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/signal.h.html
No sigset, sigignore etc.
Is this intentional?
Thanks, my fault.
Those pages looks so similar :)
2014-09-17 13:58 GMT+03:00 Otto Moerbeek o...@drijf.net:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 01:52:37PM +0300, Matti Karnaattu wrote:
Hello,
man page says:
signal - simplified software signal facilities
And the interfaces differs a lot from
Most definitely not.
Thanks for clarification. Then it is something like MIT approach except
strict license policy.
This also means that there is probably desire to dump GCC favor of LLVM?
Drawbacks are using C++ code and reduced portability to legacy
platforms.
I personally don't find GCC to
I find it far more useful and easier to work with and control than
modern desktops and wish modern programs went back to older config
standards and used text rather than *conf rubbish and that freedesktop
followed the older principles more closely when doing desktop
unification features etc..
I
hobby and safety critical don't often go together. if you just
want to improve your skills i say go for it but aiming for safety
critical is a high bar to achieve.
I like to keep bar high.
But if you're really looking to do safety critical, which industry are
you going to target?
Medical and
You can use this diff if you want, it adds support for nice(1) to do
the binding, I use it to do MP tests.
Thanks! This helps a lot.
Note that that diff does the converse of what you requested, pegging a
thread to a CPU instead of banning the CPU from running other
processes' threads.
True, but this is good starting point.
On your bigger question: I don't know of any one working on making
OpenBSD a realtime OS in the sense of
Thanks for the comprehensive answer. I was already looking for coding
conventions. That preferred style is actually fair, and it is important
that everyone is in line and respect that. I also agree that goto is
fair way to model exceptions in C language.
Couple of questions before I start
Hello,
Is it possible to dedicate CPU core to process?
What I'm looking for is simple way to take advantage of high quality and
secure code base of OpenBSD to use in real time/embedded applications.
If this trick can be achived, it is simple to use OpenBSD as platform
when critical parts of
Also if you were to provide more specifics about your goals, others may
have more input.
At the moment I'm looking hobby project to maintain/improve my skills
developing open source software and my goal is to develop/improve some
open source component(s) to be suitable on safety critical use.
Sure running Oracle Java or MATLAB on
OpenBSD would be nice but that is not OpenBSD issue but rather Oracle
and MathWorks business decisions.
There is OpenJDK is open source:
http://openjdk.java.net/projects/bsd-port/
To get companies interested to develop binaries for OpenBSD, that will
require
32 matches
Mail list logo
