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

This, have you thought about what happens when your CA needs to revoke your certificate because of some issue? can you even realistically re-pin before it's revoked (hours-days)?

at this point PEM is more standard and prevalent than pkcs#12

Google Trust Services: https://pki.goog/

I'm glad there are free alternatives to Let's Encrypt, but a major PKI provider also being by far the largest browser provider feels like a disaster waiting to happen. The check on PKI providers doing the right thing is browsers including them (or not) in their trust stores. Having both sides of that equation being significantly controlled by the same entity fundamentally breaks the trust model of WebPKI. I'm sure Google has the best of intentions, but I don't see how that's in any way a workable approach to PKI security.

that's just microsoft not being good. Google Docs exists and is pretty good.

OnlyOffice is HTML5-based too

and who controls what goes in to the spec? still Bluesky.

Not really. It's very open for everyone to participate. Further, Bluesky has been working on standardizing AT at the IETF [0][1]. They have also made a patent non-agression pledge: https://bsky.social/about/blog/10-01-2025-patent-pledge

In short, they're actively working on making AT as neutral as possible.

[0]: https://docs.bsky.app/blog/taking-at-to-ietf

[1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/bofreq-newbold-authenticate...


the malware need not actively create a release like a worm, it can just infect every build and if you don't check carefully, your next regular release will contain it.

is one of the reason we fight holy wars for SSO and strict login rules even for Dev or QA environments -- if you can get in during a dev build you can get stuff in there that carries through.

maybe QA will find it... but they're testing X number of JIRA tickets based on Y epics and if it's not on the list they're not looking...


currently legal is the lowest bar, it doesn't mean it's moral to support a genocidal state.

This is the current conundrum. It’s perfectly legal (and politically recommended) to support this genocidal regime in the name of some guy who lived and died 2000 years ago. Can’t have the dark skinned terrorists perform their cult like rituals on the floor of their beloved sacred holy sites (shared by all three might I add).

It’s faith-based warfare disguised as a terrorist fight and the AI is in full force flooding feeds of aid when the reality is it’s a god damn wasteland.


That’s a nice story spun by the lobbyists in the US and Europe (if there is such a thing in Europe). But said person 2000 years ago was crucified by the Romans at the request of the Jews.

There are Jews of every color - so feeding this as a white vs brown fight is incorrect.

I don’t belong to (nor believe) in any of the 3 religions in this fight. But historically the other two (Christians and Muslims) have been very genocidal.


He himself was a Jew. Doesn’t mean they aren’t shielding behind this being some holy crusade to rid the world of evil hamas.

The whole situation is so fucked no one wants to touch it. Netanwacko is even asking for a pardon for his crimes. Like everyone took DMT and no one cares.


It necessarily hosts a git server (using jgit), but the primary interface is as a code review tool.

even browsing the git repos it hosts uses an embedded version of another tool (gitiles).

https://gerrithub.io/ is a public instance


No, they merely feel the effects of the code, but they do not use it.

got to prevent you from looking at competitors

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

Search: