jesboat

that's the point at which you say (reasonably accurately) that the 364 byte thing is written in machine code. it is small enough to manually translate between the binary and asm

* Unauthenticated RCE vs all GNU/Linux systems (plus others) disclosed 3 weeks ago.

* Full disclosure happening in less than 2 weeks (as agreed with devs).

* Still no working fix.

require sufficient info to identify the validation method to be included in an extension in the precert?

It means no extra cost relative to the same car without an AM radio, I think.

In the 2010-2013 era, i did most of my computing over X over ssh on a fast LAN. At the time, YouTube and other video stuff worked fine, and my environment felt as responsive as local computing.

This might be less of an option then you'd think. Android software is often compiled assuming the CPU has comparatively recent instruction set extensions. Older devices, especially lower-end devices (which are more likely to be stuck on older software and more likely to be owned by people without the resources to frequently upgrade), might lack those extensions, making the app unusable. This is not a hypothetical. I've experienced this with FF a couple years ago (and even spent a couple hours trying to figure out how to build from source, but ultimately gave up.)

Different applications can have very different requirements. I've worked on systems which would kill for 5% latency and on systems that would gladly pay 5% for better memory usage.

In the normal course of events, no. If a CA demonstrates itself to be particularly untrustworthy, the actions most root programs might take (adding restrictions, or removing it from the root store entirely) still rely on those changes getting distributed to users, and if users pick up that update to the root store, they probably picked up the update which added Certainly too.

There are conceivable scenarios where GD doing something (or not doing something) could result in Certainly search no longer validating on some subset of older browsers/clients, but they're quite obscure and unlikely. If you include those scenarios as Certainly having a dependency on GoDaddy, I feel like you would also have to say that Certainly depends on their domain name registrar to not give away their domain out from under them.

From TFA:

> This government surveillance has had a measurable chilling effect on Wikipedia users, with research documenting a drop in traffic to Wikipedia articles on sensitive topics, following public revelations about the NSA’s mass surveillance in 2013.

I think their statement is accurate. If they've been accepted into root programs (and it sounds like they have), then the GoDaddy cross-sign is only relevant for older browsers, and even then requires no additional or ongoing actions from GD to keep working.

Very few people actually manage root programs: Mozilla, Apple, Microsoft, Google, Oracle, and maybe one or two others in smaller niches. Everybody else either uses the platform's store or ships an approximation (the certificate list and some basic constraints, but missing the more complex policies implemented in mozilla::pkix) to Mozilla 's store.

That includes Debian, so probably also Ubuntu. Dunno about Red Hat but it's probably the same.

> Formats like this sort of reenforce Steve Albini's claim that he only records to tape because he's more certain people will be able to play it back hundreds of years from now

This article seems like a pretty strong argument in the opposite direction: about a tape format which is effectively unreadable without significant heroics (to the extent that a documentary was made about trying to play one of these tapes.)

The format admittedly wasn't exactly successful, and I imagine more common formats would have better luck finding usable hardware. But even then, the tape still degrades.

If I really needed something to last a Very Long Time, I'd print it in highly redundant QR codes on lots of paper, and then also print the specs for QR codes and whatever other encodings were necessary.

There's at least one example on this thread so far of an actual web dev hitting this on a not-small website causing bugs for an actual user.

With a 30px record size, it's only ~600k records, which really doesn't seem that unreasonable to me

> This is dishonest competition (all other major companies do the same but not as blunt: Facebook, Google, Amazon for example). Twitter could be an exception. But it won't.

During the #deletefacebook movement, Facebook didn't ban links to or discussion of competitors.