| • Google disclosed that SHA1 hashing algorithm can be cracked
|
| • SHA1 has been theoretically crackable since 2005 but now it's actually possible to do so in a short amount of time and money
|
| • Governments have likely had the ability to crack SHA1 for years, making it insecure for government encryption
|
| • Linus Torvalds continues to downplay the security risks of SHA1 despite evidence
|
| • SHA1 is still widely used in Git and other Linux-related projects due to its convenience
|
| • Google's recent disclosure has brought attention to the issue and led to a renewed call to switch away from SHA1
|
| • Multihash, an open source project by Juan Benet, proposes a solution to future-proof hashing functions by allowing libraries to support multiple formats.
|
| • Discussion about the security of multihash and its limitations in certain situations
|
| • Criticism of Linus Torvalds' approach to security, specifically his reluctance to adopt new algorithms and protocols
|
| • Explanation of how security is a multi-layered concept, requiring multiple layers of protection to be effective
|
| • Analogy between the onion model of security (where each layer has its own separate vulnerabilities) and a chain model, where one weak link can compromise the entire system
|
| • Critique of OAuth's approach to encryption and authentication
|
| • Discussion about the use of libraries and established protocols for authentication, rather than implementing custom solutions
|
| • Recommendations for resources and tools for ensuring website security, including Mozilla Observatory and well-established application layer authentication schemes
|
| • Conversation about the importance of relying on trusted libraries and established security protocols, rather than rolling one's own solution
|
| • Node 7.6 release discusses async/await feature
|
| • Performance concerns of async/await vs callbacks/Promises
|
| • History of Promises and their adoption in Node and browsers
|
| • Async/await as syntactic sugar on top of Promises
|
| • Use cases for async/await, including error handling
|
| • Comparison of native Promises with third-party libraries like Bluebird
|
| • Discussion of controversy around Promises in code
|
| • Rachel White's indifferent stance on code preferences and arguments
|
| • Alex Sexton mentioning error handling as a major issue with Promises
|
| • Comparison between OOP and functional programming styles
|
| • Mention of async/await and its potential to replace Promises
|
| • Generator functions as an alternative to Promises for asynchronous coding
|
| • Callback hell and the need to avoid it through proper code writing
|
| • Serial port data handling and asynchronous processing
|
| • Node.js performance arguments (Promises vs Bluebird)
|
| • Callback hell in Node.js programming
|
| • Augmented reality library AR.js and its features
|
| • Performance issues with web development and hardware interaction
|
| • Discussion of using the Leap Motion device for augmented reality applications
|
| • Mention of the Myo armband as a potential tool for hand gesture recognition
|
| • RFID chip in Rachel White's hand
|
| • Potential mashup projects combining various technologies (Leap Motion, Myo, etc.)
|
| • History of WebGL development and demos that pushed forward browser capabilities
|
| • Discussion of A-Frame and three.js libraries
|
| • Regl library as an alternative to three.js with better tooling and debugging
|
| • Regl library
|
| • bits.coop (Mikola and Substack's consulting service)
|
| • Observatory from Mozilla (security checker)
|
| • Mariko Kosaka's talk "How Computers Read Pixels"
|
| • Future plans for regular picks by Rachel White |
