TimWolla

You said it “takes 2 minutes”: Is it 2 minutes to apply or 2 minutes to apply and get approved?

Note that this only is available to high volume senders (https://developers.google.com/gmail/markup/registering-with-...):

> Consistent history of sending a high volume of mail from your domain (order of hundred emails a day minimum to Gmail) for a few weeks at least.

> I'm not sure what you mean by parallelism through disabling FK integrity.

Say you have a `user` table and a `post` table with `post.user_id` being a FOREIGN KEY on `user.user_id`. Without disabling FK integrity you would not be able to restore a post without restoring the user first. When restoring in parallel this might or might not work out.

I forgot about the security feature by GitHub: oauth_authorization.destroy – Personal access token (API) deleted automatically (found in a public repository)

I just went ahead: https://github.com/staab/git-chat/pull/1

I don't think it's smart to commit login credentials to that GitHub account, even if it's a throw away: https://github.com/staab/git-chat/blob/61c401e719febaf3e05f4...

Consider using a OAuth token.

You can use a link local address of your public interface in IPv6.

They don't.

Possibly a dist-upgrade instead of an upgrade, but generally: Yes.

AFAIK the CVV is not required to perform a transaction. It's just that you take the hit in case a fraud occurs when you don't check the CVV.

My first reaction to that one was that it looked like Blender, the 3D software. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)

It should be noted that this is not possible with regular expressions in the traditional sense (i.e. regular expressions only matching regular languages): http://math.stackexchange.com/a/181233/21405

Because of back references PCRE regular expressions can match non-regular languages as well.

It does provide host key rotation in OpenSSH 6.8+: http://blog.djm.net.au/2015/02/key-rotation-in-openssh-68.ht...

It was changed by 'sctb':

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11961301

Not without turning off CloudFlare. Maybe the CloudFlare Business Plan as well, though I don't know whether it supports multiple non-wildcard certificates.

> Secondly, they didn't even capitalize Seafile's company name, but they did capitalize the competition's name (Dropbox).

That was the fault of Google Translate, see the original: http://www.golem.de/news/sperrung-paypal-entschuldigt-sich-b...

It does not:

> For convenience, the recommended installation is via NPM. If you'd prefer, you may choose to do a manual installation instead. (highlighting by me)

It is written in Perl.

Money quote:

> 8.2.2016 @ 15:45: Received response from Dominik Reichl: The vulnerability will not be fixed. The indirect costs of switching to HTTPS (like lost advertisement revenue) make it a inviable solution.

What about alternative operating systems? Looking at Linux: Will a random Linux distribution work? Will a recent Kernel be required?

To expand on that topic: You can find all the Dockerfiles of the official images linked at the very top on Docker Hub [1]. Once my pull request is merged a Docker-Redis maintainer will have to open another pull request to update the references of the official image on Docker hub [2].

In fact I already updated the Redis Docker image once. You can see the full process there [3].

[1] https://hub.docker.com/_/redis/ [2] https://github.com/docker-library/official-images/pulls [3] https://github.com/docker-library/redis/pull/25

I just submitted a pull request: https://github.com/docker-library/redis/pull/57

> I don't want every single machine I use to be able to authenticate as me to anyone else.

There is the `-c` option to `ssh-add` for that reason:

     -c      Indicates that added identities should be subject to confirmation
             before being used for authentication.  Confirmation is performed
             by ssh-askpass(1).  Successful confirmation is signaled by a zero
             exit status from ssh-askpass(1), rather than text entered into
             the requester.

I submitted it, because I wondered why suddenly there were 67 updated packages available for my server. Other's might wonder as well.

I have used it in the past, that's why I assumed my cached version was cleared.

> So long as there's one private key corresponding to a pinned public key, the malware's defeated if the private key can be recovered (assuming I'm understanding your suggestion correctly).

Once the ransomware delivered the page to enough users (for some number of enough) it can permanently remove the key used to do so. The header now contains the just-removed key used to poison the browser and a randomly generated hash that does not correspond to a valid key. This assumes that the administrator does not detect the ransomware before it does so.

> ¹ This is assuming browsers won't accept HPKP headers that don't pass for the current connection. I haven't actually checked this.

RFC 7469 requires this (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7469#section-2.5):

   o  The TLS connection was authenticated with a certificate chain
      containing at least one of the SPKI structures indicated by at
      least one of the given SPKI Fingerprints (see Section 2.6).

IIRC The pin must contain at least one key that's in the current chain and at least one key that's not in the current chain.

So it first would need to set the header to include the ransomed key, then deliver the page using that key and afterwards remove the other keys.

Edit: I just read in the RFC. It is in section 2.5 (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7469#section-2.5):

   o  The TLS connection was authenticated with a certificate chain
      containing at least one of the SPKI structures indicated by at
      least one of the given SPKI Fingerprints (see Section 2.6).

   o  The given set of Pins contains at least one Pin that does NOT
      refer to an SPKI in the certificate chain.  (That is, the host
      must set a Backup Pin; see Section 4.3.)

I just read through the issue and then went to cyph.im to take a look myself. It fails in my Firefox because of a HPKP problem, so it seems like I accidentally deleted the cached version (or it was cleaned up automatically?). How would you solve that issue for your use case?

> Give each container host a /96 address and let it assign container IPs from the remaining /32, for up to four billion containers per host.

A /80 for Docker is preferred because it can map 1 to 1 onto the mac address for SLAAC.

see also: https://docs.docker.com/v1.5/articles/networking/#ipv6

Sorry, I downvoted you by accident, while focusing my browser window.