Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | koolba's commentslogin

Even SHA pinning only lets you go one hop. If the pinned action itself uses any non pinned actions, you’re still susceptible.

I don’t think this problem is fixable without a higher level way to specify the full nested tree. Something like TOFU for the first time your action ran (pinning all children as of that run) might be an improvement, but that is still can be gamed by a timed attack that modifies the action at a later date (literally, if time greater than X do …).


It is more than just a tree of actions, since actions bring in shell scripts and they can download and execute arbitrary code that isn’t pinned.

With enough drinks and a long enough flight, it’s unavoidable.

The keyword being "comfortable".

Most certainly avoidable, unfortunately.


So it reads the packets and replaces the byte sequences at the kernel level? How does that work across packet boundaries?

Secrets are detected before encryption in the user buffer but rewrites happen post encryption in the kernel buffer to be sent on the wire.

packets boundaries are not an issue because detection happen at the SSL write where we have the full secret in the buffer and its position so we can know at rewrite time that the secret is cross 2 packets and rewrite it in 2 separate operations. We also have to update the TLS session hash at the end to not corrupt the TLS frame.


> GP is referring to Canal+ who'd play that one weekly porn movie on saturday evening.

As an Anglophone it counts as taking a 1-credit foreign language class.


> … NJ diners because one saw the birth of Unicode

While it’s possible that Unicode was also conceived at a diner, you’re likely thinking of UTF-8. Unicode was from a decade earlier.

https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ucs/utf-8-history.txt


Yup! That's what I was thinking about. In fact I did read this right before posting (though I had found it at https://doc.cat-v.org/bell_labs/utf-8_history) but only to validate that it had been in a NJ diner, so I missed my confusion of UTF-8 with Unicode.

I would not make a good fact-checker :(


What’s wrong with express?

> Old server nginx converted to reverse proxy We wrote a Python script that parsed every server {} block across all 34 Nginx site configs, backed up the originals, and replaced them with proxy configurations pointing to the new server. This meant that during DNS propagation, any request still hitting the old IP was silently forwarded. No user would see a disruption.

What was the config on the receiving side to support this? Did you whitelist the old server IP to trust the forwarding headers? Otherwise you’d get the old server IP in your app logs. Not a huge deal for an hour but if something went wrong it can get confusing.


> i presume they wont let you “manage all your AI spend in one place” for free.

Of course they will. In return they get to control who they’re routing requests to. I wouldn’t be surprised if this turns I to the LLM equivalent of “paying for order flow”.


i got shivers thinking about a future ai dynamic pricing and automatic gateway choosing the cheapest provider available


shivers? as in it frightens you? i believe there is no way around tokens being prices like gasoline at the gas station - it changes every hour. Any other system means you are either over- or underspending.


Openrouter already does this, unless I've misunderstood the premise.


They can route between models but you pay the standard rate for whichever model is selected (plus 5% fee). Afaik all current model providers have fixed prices per tokens which don't vary depending on, say, demand or hardware availability.


And also completely meaningless as a credit rating in the context of creditworthiness specifically means the ability to repay. And they can always print dollar bills to do so.

Now whether that $1 in 20 years will buy anything is an entirely different story.


Because that’s what has traditionally allowed western countries to have a wide availability and inventory of goods vs communist economies.


But why does the availability have to be wide? Maybe those stories can do few things, but do them well. Sell staple foods and healthy choices.


Because than people won’t come to your store. People buy where they can purchase the maximum of their shopping cart in a single place.

That is why you have loss leader grocers, where they pull people with dramatic discounts on specific items, but the total cart costs the same


That's not how it used to work. That's still not how it works in my country. I buy my bread from a specialized shop, my cheese from another, and my fresh produce from yet another. I know people who only buy their meat from a butcher (I do it sometimes, but not always).


It really depends on the countries culture


I understand your point of view. But in cities of all sizes, it's easier to not have to do that. For example in NYC, a medium size city, you can easily go do your shopping in multiple places, and not at the same time.


Yes, and some people do that.

Some consumers go to specific stores to purchase specific qualities of brands.

But most do not, especially for convenience products. You get it where you can.


Counter point: China.

Economic viability isn't what led to "wide availability and inventory". No, it's imperialism. It's exploitation of the Global South. It's paying slave wages through subsidiaries in West Africa to cocoa farmers while making sure those countries stay poor, for example.

We also wage economic war on our our anointed enemies like Cuba and then use the inevitable result of that economic warfare as a reason why our system is good.


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: