nichtverstehen
Joined 11 years ago
Karma
24
Submissions
15
Member since
Sep 7
Recent submissions
Comment · 5 days ago
Apple doesn't give direct control over that unfortunately. Here is an excellent article on that topic:
https://eclecticlight.co/2023/10/23/how-does-macos-manage-vi...
Comment · 5 days ago
Doh :/. An LLM would not make such a silly mistake.
Fixing, thank you!
Comment · 5 days ago
Thank you!
We have all the hosts enrolled into MDM, so we have all sorts of access ready: SSH, KVM, VNC, MDM. With Macs in the DC we found having all these ways to access the machines is really essential. Things break in unexpected ways.
In terms of settings, besides the obvous (do not sleep, do not auto-update, etc), disabling USB restricted mode helps a lot (Privacy&Security > Allow accessories to connect) - no need to approve connected devices via UI.
What are you building if it's not a secret?
Comment · 5 days ago
Yeah, as alluded to in the post, we have a custom p2p distribution, very inspired by BitTorrent. So you're on the right track :). We'll probably share more on that topic at some point too.
But honestly before we had that, we started with a system where nodes pulled whole images from each other (a decentralized algorithm without central coordination, but no chunking). It worked surprisingly well considering how simple the implementation was.
Comment · 5 days ago
That stack is based on xtool at its core (xtool.io). It's very cool, but still early for steady enterprise use IMO.
Also it doesn't have iOS Simulator, so automated testing is out of question. I doubt that porting the Simulator would be feasible, since it requires macOS kernel.
Well, maybe with XNU in a VM and reimplementing parts of macOS userland. Would love to see someone try.
Comment · 5 days ago
I was hopeful that they might lift the limit with a refresh of Mac Pro (it even had a rack mount version). But with Mac Pro discontinued not keeping the hopes up anymore.
Comment · 5 days ago
Author here. Happy to answer questions.
Comment · 3 years ago
> it's also a bit weird to create a profile for a new site instead of saving entered data
Doesn't always work reliably with Bitwarden ;)
Comment · 3 years ago
I use and pay for Bitwarden. I want it to succeed, but I still find it weird.
1. Security.
Bitwarden's documentation on its security model is quite thin.
1password has a great write-up about how it works in detail: https://1passwordstatic.com/files/security/1password-white-p.... Corresponding doc for Bitwarden is much lighter on detail: https://bitwarden.com/help/bitwarden-security-white-paper/.
The security audits they list of https://bitwarden.com/help/is-bitwarden-audited/ are focused on the client software implementation bits, and make no judgement on the overall security model.
My main concern is that the password is the only key that is needed to both log into the server and to decrypt the vault. There is no additional key that is completely offline, like 1password Secret Key (that is presumably stored in Keychain / Secure Enclave at rest). A password seems somewhat more easily stealable (with keyloggers or clipboard loggers etc).
I am not a security expert, but I know enough to be concerned :). I wish there was more discussion on the implications of this difference on security models.
2. Offline access.
Bitwarden does not like to work offline.
You can unlock and view the vault, but you cannot make any changes without active connection to the internet! And Bitwarden will show you a very generic error ("failed to fetch") if you try editing while offline, it won't give you any suggestion on what to do.
Moreover, apparently they will delete the local copy of the vault if internet connection is missing for 30 days: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitwarden/comments/vtaqi0/comment/i.... That's just nuts if true. I should not rely on the Cloud to have access to the vault as stored locally as long as I have the password.
While there is a general fear about trusting The Cloud as the source of truth for accessing the passwords, this caused very tangible practical issues. I have actually run into needing Bitwarden while on the go. Also the CloudFlare IP that Bitwarden uses was somehow blocked by my provider for some time, and that broke Bitwarden completely (both the provider and Bitwarden neglected to do anything about the problem when contacted).
3. UX.
You get used to it, but it's simply not great.
Worst of all, the UI of the browser extension is prone to data loss. The Bitwarden popup resets the state every time it is unfocused. So imagine the scenario:
* I start creating a new entry and generate a password. * I briefly dismiss the Bitwarden popup to paste the password into the website. * I open Bitward popup again hoping to finish entering the data and save. But the entry is gone. I just need to hope that the generated password is still on the clipboard.
1password in contrast keeps full UI state and partially entered data even if the vault is locked in the interim.
Comment · 3 years ago
This feeling when you realize drug money laundering overhead is still lower than Apple tax — :(
And anyway these costs will be just passed on to the Dutch drug consumers, so what exactly is achieved here?
Comment · 3 years ago
No need to imagine. That's public transportation. You can physically enter a bus and sit there and get to places for free.
But you're supposed to get a ticket. Or is it fair game to use public transport for free because you can?
Comment · 3 years ago
The print preview in a terminal is mind-blowing. Just learnt about Sixels (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel). Quite a few terminal emulators support them: https://www.arewesixelyet.com/
I wonder though which terminal with sixels Tavis used on Windows to produce the screenshots in README. Can't recognize the icon.
Comment · 5 years ago
> the myriad of newer alternatives that boil Redux down even more to something even simpler)
Going on a tangent here, could you suggest any notable library replacing redux to look at?