HN user

passfree

166 karma
Posts88
Comments87
View on HN
seclists.org 11y ago

Nmap visualisation tool

passfree
1pts0
www.foobaz.io 11y ago

Foobar 1.5 Is Out – GitHub Integration

passfree
2pts0
www.foobaz.io 11y ago

Foobar GitHub Gist Integration

passfree
1pts0
www.foobaz.io 11y ago

Foobar Is Free

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Foobar Trial

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Introducing Foobar – Make your next big idea

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Security Challenges in Node.js

passfree
2pts0
imgur.com 11y ago

The Correct Way to Wire Arduino Nano with ESP8266 ESP-01

passfree
1pts0
www.foobaz.io 11y ago

Foobar – code editor for learning how to code

passfree
1pts0
www.websecurify.com 11y ago

HandsWarmer – a hand warming app for Mac OS X

passfree
1pts0
www.proxyapp.io 11y ago

Web Interception Proxy for Mac OS X

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

The Best Survey Ever

passfree
1pts0
www.sektioneins.de 11y ago

Drupal 7.31 Pre Auth SQL Injection Vulnerability

passfree
6pts0
docs.google.com 11y ago

The ASCII Survey

passfree
3pts0
mikemonday.com 11y ago

Stuck in a Loop?

passfree
2pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Haxor Lands in Hollywood

passfree
2pts0
suite.websecurify.com 11y ago

ShellShock – Online Testing Tool

passfree
2pts0
suite.websecurify.com 11y ago

WPScanner – Online Wordpress Vulnerability Scanner

passfree
2pts0
www.youtube.com 11y ago

Who Am I – No System Is Safe

passfree
2pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Websecurify For iOS Is Now Free

passfree
1pts0
suite.websecurify.com 11y ago

Online/Offline Encoder/Decoder

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Attacking Node.js and MongoDB – Part To

passfree
1pts0
news.ycombinator.com 11y ago

Ask HN: Do you care about web security?

passfree
1pts1
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Continuous Delivery + Security = Explained

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Web Developers Need Security Tools

passfree
1pts0
blog.websecurify.com 11y ago

Hacking Node.js and MongoDB

passfree
2pts0
github.com 11y ago

Publish Wintersmith Static Websites To Appengine

passfree
1pts0
www.slideshare.net 12y ago

Secure Coding – Web Application Security Vulnerabilities and Best Practices

passfree
1pts0
www.slideshare.net 12y ago

Unicode Hacking

passfree
2pts0
blog.websecurify.com 12y ago

Hands On With Guided Testing

passfree
1pts0

The problem with your approach is that you are assuming that people are fine that scan for in production for security issues. While it is true that everyone does it, this arguments falls flat because there are plenty of systems which will avoid the risk and for good reasons.

Well, those who have done some iOS or Android development know that any good app requires extensive hacking. Unfortunately this doesn't work in a cross-platform manner. For the simplest applications having a cross-platform framework is fine but if you really want to make an immersive app for iOS or Android you need to go native. Now this is not to say that some applications will work perfectly fine under this framework.

Yes it is over-engineered. Heck, even WordPress is engineered. Blogs are essentially static pages with the comments as a moving part (i.e. dynamic). Most blogs can happily leave on a static web folder if bound to something like Disqus or whatever you decide to use.

HTTPS is a good idea but it really doesn't work for me. I am one of those paranoid people who want full end-to-end SSL without exceptions. HTTPS Everywhere doesn't fill the bill.

This is why the company I work for created PanicMode (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/panic-mode/lamdafc...).

PanicMode is ridiculously simple extension. Once activated, it will swap HTTP for HTTPS without leaking even a single packet. Not even pre-flight requests are spared.

PanicMode is not good for general purpose browsing mainly because 99% of the site break badly, i.e. they do not support SSL at all. That is very telling and sad reality. The way I use it is with profiles. I have a bunch of chrome profiles that I use for different purpose. One of my profiles is just for social browsing - facebook etc. I have another one for company stuff. Those profile have panic mode installed and activated. Because I care about security in those profiles I don't mind if I click on a facebook link and it doesn't open up because at least I know that I am protected against side-channel attacks.

It is a very simple mechanism but works well when used effectively.

I think this is a ridiculous thing to say. Don't think of the web as dev platform. Think of it as OpenGL or any other GL language. To create a game you need to use a graphics card which provides a primitive set of instructions but they can be empowered with the help of libraries. The web is the same. It provides a primitive set of functions that can be represented in a common way. They are still usable on their own but much more useful as part of frameworks.

Web technologies is for UI what opengl is for gaming.

Really? Web technologies are much easier to work with and make a much better UI toolkit. Just look at the share amount of developers doing Web stuff and compare them with the amount of developers doing iOS.

And btw, iOS development is easy for as long as you do not want to customize things. Once you start changing the standard controls you are entering the land of no return.

Now compare this with web technologies which are designed to be customizable.

Interesting concept. I did sign up to test it out. However, I think that voice control is not practical with the amount of email we receive on daily basis. Some people will receive more than 100 messages per day that needs to be answered and a voice activated software will not cut it.

However, looking beyond this challenge, the idea is still cool and having an AI assistant to sort out your inbox will be certainly a breakthrough technology. Besides web, email is perhaps one of the greatest innovations of the 20th century but it needs to be brought in the 21st, i.e Email 2.0.

There are no limitations of what you can do via a web browser. My company personally developed and delivered projects otherwise thought not possible in browser environments. With the help of extensions and solid JS and HTML, everything is possible. Of course super low level stuff are out of the picture but this is not normal users will be concerned about.

Btw, we debug a lot of JS code and although Chrome has better developer tools they do crash... a lot and are unresponsive too. Chrome/Webkit should have native tools not the one written in JavaScript because this is a mess. They are still better than Firefox's dev tools.

I have also experienced this sad situation with Firefox. XUL was my biggest disappointment because mozilla was not willing to invest any time to make it better. Instead they shipped this monstrosity called addon-sdk. You need python to develop JS applications? This is stupid.

I would love to see firefox converging with NodeJS but given mozilla's attitude towards developers lately I seriously doubt that it will ever happen.

Firefox has a very rich history and the technology is fantastic but sadly it is not made to be easy to the developer.

$0.99 for an App is not sustainable pricing unless your product is mass-marketed in order to make up the numbers. My company have several products in iOS and Mac App Stores and none of them are near this price. In fact, one of our products (Websecurify for iOS) is $16 which you may say is an expensive app for iOS but this is a more realistic pricing. I doubt we would have achieved any effect if we had priced it $0.99. Btw, the next version of our app will probably cost twice as much because even $16 is barely sustainable.

I think it is time for iOS developers get their strategy checked up. I know a lot of people want to get their app/game to a lot of people but unless you have evidence that you app is reaching millions of people, it is not going to work.

XSS in TweetDeck 12 years ago

It is unknown because nobody checked. Why nobody checked? Because it is too simple so nobody thought that it will work until now.

This is so wrong in some many levels.

1. They should not ask for any password first of all 2. They post the password to their server when they could have checked it on the client 3. The password is sent as GET meaning that it is in the URL and it will be recorded in your history and perhaps anything else that keeps log of the URLs you visit

100% fail