When I interviewed at Facebook as a new grad 7 years ago, I used my "Ask your interviewers a question" time to ask precisely this because I'd been trying to play around with the client side javascript and the constant infinite for loop always stood out to me.
This, and this sort of thing in general, are why I'm not very enthusiastic about security on the web.
Facebook and Google can avoid security holes like these, sure. Perhaps you will too -- that is, you'll avoid this particular one. What about the fifty others, subtly interdependent sources of security problems?
What's the deal with this? The Atlantic, Wired, and dev.to all tell me I'm offline on first load. I have to use ctrl-shift-R to get any page content, and I've never been offline when this happens.
I mean, I'm assuming there are service worker shenanigans at play here, but given that it's always wrong about my online status, this seems like a fairly big bug on someone's part. Just wish I knew where to file or check its status.
Of course, another approach to securing data might be to stop using things for purposes they weren't designed to be used for in the first place... I'm afraid I don't see that happening any time soon, though.
14 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 32.8 ms ] threadFacebook and Google can avoid security holes like these, sure. Perhaps you will too -- that is, you'll avoid this particular one. What about the fifty others, subtly interdependent sources of security problems?
I mean, I'm assuming there are service worker shenanigans at play here, but given that it's always wrong about my online status, this seems like a fairly big bug on someone's part. Just wish I knew where to file or check its status.
I don't see how people could have prevented this without the knowledge of such an attack