

Well, they’re called “zero days” for a reason.
made you look


Well, they’re called “zero days” for a reason.


As nice as DANE is, it just shifts the burden of trust to your DNS provider. Like if you hop on Wi-Fi at a coffee shop, said network can simply MITM connections and supply their own certs via re-writing the DNS.
You can encrypt DNS to prevent that, but now you need a way to ensure your DNS client already trusts the desired DNS server, etc.
As much as people dislike CAs, they’re a proven solution to a problem that’s already implemented in nearly every device on the planet.


It’s an access control method, called “authorized fetch”. Rather than broadcasting the data you just announce the source of it, and then any client that wants to show it needs to negotiate with the originating server to request the data (And then blocklists and such come into play)
Say you’ve got 3 users, A, B, and C. A has blocked C, B follows A, and C follows B. Now A makes a post, B sees it in their feed and reboosts it, what does C see?
If B’s server sends the full response along, then C can see the contents of A’s post even though they’ve been blocked by A. But if all it sends is the URL of the post, C’s server needs to make a request for it (providing authentication), and then A’s server can reject it, so C sees nothing.


deleted by creator


While there’s an overhead to safer runtime environments, I wouldn’t put much blame there. I feel like “back in the day” when something was inefficient you noticed it quicker because it had a much larger impact, windows would stop updating, the mouse would get laggy, music would start stuttering. These days you can take up 99% of the CPU time and the system will still chug along without any of those issues showing.
I remember early Twitter had a “famous” performance issue, where the sticky heading bar would slow systems down, because they were re-scanning the entire page DOM on every scroll operation to find and adjust the header, rather than just caching a reference to it. Meanwhile yesterday I read an article about the evolution of the preferences UI in Apple OSs, that showed them off by running each individual version of said OS in VMs embedded within the page. It wasn’t snappy, but it didn’t have the “entire system slows down and stops responding” issues you saw a decade or so ago.
Basically, devs aren’t being punished (by tooling) for being inefficient, so they don’t notice when they are, and newer devs never realise they need to.
Depends on how you handle the OOM error though, aborting the process is fine while “try to recover and continue” is the problem.