/g/ - Technology

install openbsd

[Make a Post]
[X]





HTTP cancer Nanonymous No.1252 [D][S][L][A][C] >>1533 >>1549

HTTP is a piece of cancer because its structure and design is against anonymity (User-Agent, cookies). Lots of identifiable metadata is transmitted through the headers.
Imageboards should have their own dedicated protocol for data transfer (perhaps a heavily stripped down version of HTTP).

Nanonymous No.1253 [D] >>1254 >>7333

90% of websites work fine if you send no headers besides Host. Lots keep working even without that. I think it's kind of funny that hakase is blocking people based on their headers. The proxies sending them could remove the headers without any loss of functionality. The problem, as per usual, is normalfags who don't give a fuck about anonymity or privacy if it means a .01% chance of improving functionality.
(Another funny thing: hakase can't set http-headers from his code because of the way its set up, so instead he sets headers using html meta tags)

Nanonymous No.1254 [D] >>1256

>>1253
Endlessly searching for the perfect, anonymous protocol is pointless when 99% of websites are corrupted from within, i.e. willingly give information to outside groups or government or even give them control. The humans running the sites are the biggest security risk by far for most sites.

>>1253
Why is that funny? If someone is going to go through the trouble of using a proxy and configuring it to remove headers, they could more easily just, you know, use Tor like the site is intended for.

Nanonymous No.1256 [D] >>1257 >>1260

>>1254
It's nice to be able to use nanochan from a normal browser that you can use your bank from. Plus, I don't trust any iphone apps not to be botnetted. But the point is that the clearnet proxies (onion.sh, onion.to) could be configured not to send any special headers. I'm not sure why they aren't.

Nanonymous No.1257 [D] >>1261 >>1262 >>1458

>>1256
If someone ever makes another alternate/hidden internet, there needs to be some sort of standard content hashing, so nothing needs to be re-uploaded. Just post the SHA-whatever of the image you wanted to post, and it will be presented through the efforts of the network. Combine that with image recognition and I bet you could really lower the bandwidth and storage requirements of most of the internet.

Nanonymous No.1260 [D]

>>1256
>It's nice to be able to use nanochan from a normal browser.
You are not welcome here. Go to another imageboard which is not founded upon the principles of anonymity and non-botnet computing.
>muh iphone
yeah, fuck off normalscum
>could be configured not to send any special headers
And that has not happened. Unless it does, we will be free of cucknetters for the time being.

Nanonymous No.1261 [D] >>1566

>>1257
Interesting idea, but then noone would want to store images or worse video files because they are going to have to pay for the server fees for every single usage of that image in the world, but without any of the traffic or income. I think it's still a valid idea, but that will have to be worked on.

Nanonymous No.1262 [D] >>1263 >>1566

>>1257
Content-addressable networks are not a new concept. IPFS and the Dat projects are pretty active on that front right now. Content-addressable networks have some serious privacy challenges to solve, though.

Nanonymous No.1263 [D] >>1264

>>1262
>IPFS
Last time I used it, IPFS was a slow bloated piece of shit - had to wait half a second to display the --help message. And that's when it's written in a compiled language.
The fact that ipfs had support for multiple hash functions available was also a masive design flaw, allowing for significant data duplication among people who preferred different hash functions. They should just fucking use SHA-3 or something similarly future-proof and fucking stick with it.
Verdict: 3/10 slow as fuck pajeet shit with bad design

Nanonymous No.1264 [D] >>1265 >>1588

>>1263

What kind of potato machine did you try that on?

$ time ./ipfs --help >/dev/null

real 0m0.092s
user 0m0.068s
sys 0m0.029s

And that is on a Celeron based notebook with shitty flash.

Nanonymous No.1265 [D] >>1266 >>1267

>>1264
>0.1 second to print a help message
Still totally unacceptable.
Similarly complex software written in a real programming language like C does not take 0.1 fucking seconds to print a few lines of text to the fucking screen god damn it. IPFS bloatshit takes about 100x longer.
$ time git help >/dev/null
0m00.00s real 0m00.01s user 0m00.00s system

Nanonymous No.1266 [D]

>>1265
That was an Athlon XP 2000+ btw. If I had tried to run ipfs on that computer, it would probably have taken half a second or longer.

Nanonymous No.1267 [D] >>1281 >>1326

>>1265
C supremacists are having a chilling effect on the diverse rustaceans on this board. It's creating a toxic environment.

Nanonymous No.1281 [D] >>1282

>>1267
so if you are good with both languages, you're a crustacean?

Nanonymous No.1282 [D]

>>1281
>C-rustacean
lol nice one

Nanonymous No.1283 [D]

>>1203
Hit the funnybone for massive damage

Nanonymous No.1326 [D]

>>1267
>toxic environment
I wonder where I heard that before...

Nanonymous No.1458 [D]

>>1257
Yes, the same VirusTotal does:
- hash the file before uploading
- check whether it already exist
- if not upload the file.
>IPFS
Above is such a simple thing to implement IPFS would be over-kill, of course.

Nanonymous No.1533 [D][U][F]
File: f82983ab5769300948d0eb97f7b604a2ee4966b1362b295e0e4daa8c01a7bd81.png (dl) (611.14 KiB)

>>1252
correct. luckily this imageboard is one of the few places that works without cookies,"referer"[sic], or JS.

Nanonymous No.1549 [D] >>1550

>>1252
HTTP, Browsers and SSL are all problematic for anonymity. Only solution is a maintainable fork of, say, Firefox.

Nanonymous No.1550 [D] >>1553

>>1549
Better yet, Tor Browser because they have already done quite a few things to avoid fingerprintability but still:
- Reset NoScript to allow Javascript every time you restart
- Do not have uBlock Origin or uMatrix installed
- Send HTTP referrers
- Have fingerprintable SSL through intermediate SSL certificates
- Have many tickets which are neglected but are quite concerning:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=!closed&component=Applications%2FTor+Browser

Nanonymous No.1553 [D]

>>1550
>Have fingerprintable SSL through intermediate SSL certificates
Apparantly not since the 'cert8.db' file is stored in memory and not on disk, this is cleared upon New Identity but there's still a mention of it in 'torbutton.js' which says it doesn't clear it:
https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/21559

Nanonymous No.1566 [D]

>>1261
No, p2p networks are feasible. See Napster, torrent, etc before they were killed for ((("""piracy"""))) reasons. All we're waiting for is an anonymous network like Freenet to become big.
>>1262
>Content-addressable networks are not a new concept.
exactly my response when the IPFS meme started

Nanonymous No.1587 [D]

those are terrible numbers you fuck. stop posting

Nanonymous No.1588 [D]

>>1264
those are terrible numbers you fuck. stop posting
and even with a pentium 2 those would be terrible numbers

Nanonymous No.7333 [D]
>Imageboards should have their own dedicated protocol for data transfer (perhaps a heavily stripped down version of HTTP).
or also Imageboard application instead of web browser. however, it would be uncomfortable when people post links on imageboards and you have to copy them and open by web browser

>>1253
>90% of websites work fine if you send no headers besides Host.
not anymore thanks to (((cloudflare))). also if you don't send any headers you will be fingerprinted, you will stand out from other people

Nanonymous No.7624 [D]
>however, it would be uncomfortable when people post links on imageboards and you have to copy them and open by web browser
not as unconfortable having an app in the browser

Nanonymous No.7631 [D] >>7714
should imageboard application allow imageboards and boards to have different looks and style? or should it be user controllable?

Nanonymous No.7714 [D]
>>7631
it should follow the same theme as the rest of the OS

Nanonymous No.7773 [D]
An imageboard specific protocol seems too specific, as in, why would you want to take the effort to replace HTTP and then limit it to just board use? Something similar to TLS + Gopher + HTTP/1.1, with all the anti-privacy shit cut out, would be good. Perhaps some elements of Gopher could be rolled into it, such as a default structured format, but allow for devs to customize beyond that with something resembling "HTTP/1.1". Branding it as some sort of "new" Gopher protocol would emphasize the non-commercial focus. HTTP has turned to shit because it is no longer focused on education and communication, but instead has been steered by commercialization. The commercial HTTP web should be distinctly separate from the info web. Communication mediums have always turned to shit after commercial interests take over and start disseminating advertisements.

Nanonymous No.7915 [D] >>8074
>An imageboard specific protocol seems too specific, as in, why would you want to take the effort to replace HTTP and then limit it to just board use?
You don't know what you're talking about. ANYTHING is better than HTTP (well okay not anything, because UNIXniggers will create garbge that competes with HTTP for the retard crown). An imageboard protocol is trivial to implement.

Nanonymous No.7917 [D] >>7934
...and using HTTP means you get all the bugs of HTTP, I forgot to mention.

Nanonymous No.7934 [D] >>7935
>>7917
>bugs of HTTP
HTTP is a protocol. Implementations have bugs.

Nanonymous No.7935 [D] >>7937 >>8076
>>7934
Implementing HTTP is a bug.

Nanonymous No.7937 [D] >>8076 >>8085
>>7935
It's also 5 lines of code and gets you support for thousands of existing clients and middlewares

Nanonymous No.8074 [D]
>>7915
Seems a bit too regimented. Do you dress-up before you fetch your mail?

Nanonymous No.8076 [D]
>>7935
this. /thread
>>7937
what the fuck is an HTTP client? a thing that sends "GET / HTTP/1.1\r\nHost: gaycunt.gaytld\r\n\r\" ?

Nanonymous No.8085 [D] >>8086
>>7937
>support for thousands of existing clients and middlewares
That's also a bug.

Nanonymous No.8086 [D] >>8088
>>8085
And let me expand on this before the tard kills himself.
Most software is trash. If you're aiming to support most software, then you're making and ensuing the continuity of trash.
Instead, start talking about supporting good things.

Nanonymous No.8088 [D]
>>8086
The issue with this kind of LARPing is that it breaks my immersion. I like to pretend as I'm reading these threads that one of you faggots is actually going to go out and build this shit (like based hapase did almost a year ago now. What are other anons doing for nano day?). When a nocoder comes along and pretends that he's going to rebuild modern computing from the transistor up, it ruins my ability to pretend he'll actually follow through. Just my two cents.

Nanonymous No.8090 [D] >>8098
>not using HTTP is like rebuilding computing from the transistor

Nanonymous No.8098 [D]
>>8090
Most software is trash, but hardware is perfectly fine? ME? M-OK in your books? We'll build a new empire on top of intel's microcode? Those faggots talking about doing photolithography at home are disgusting LARPers, but you're the real deal? We'll accept no compromises, unless they involve transistors, at which point we'll compromise a little bit, because we are very serious.

Nanonymous No.8102 [D]
noone here talked about hardware except you. i agree that most hardware projects are LARP. we're talking about implementing an imageboard here and using something other than HTTP. why would you use HTTP for that shit? It's like using XMPP to impement chat. there's not even any real development costs saved by using either of those. from the ground up protocol is just as fast (and better in every way) than "reusing" HTTP

Nanonymous No.8110 [D][U][F] >>8127 >>8224 >>8315
File: 24f9a0cd6de3e17172c2baa44949d39155b474986bb26731f0e06a4eff017646.png (dl) (15.05 KiB)
So how would you structure the HTTP replacement? While there's surely crap rolled into it, and it's snowballing with each revision, the original concept didn't seem that bad. Everything after HTTP1.1 is shit, but what would you change?

Nanonymous No.8125 [D][U][F] >>8356
File: cb3538e1c2ab99b8241063490b3957770c7c4d83180ec73f196e831b4bccf96b.png (dl) (14.31 KiB)
>HTTP
Ha, just realized that most of my gripes are with HTML, not HTTP. Just take HTML3 and cherry-pick the good parts and call it something else. With some of these projects, it will take less time to undo anti-privacy shit, than build anew.

Nanonymous No.8127 [D]
>>8110
>mandatory encryption (double-ratchet, or anything that's doesn't need CA)
>low-latency (concurrency - ZeroMQ-like)
>servers/client exposes less metadata (http-header contains too many useless informations - metadata could also be encrypted)
>remove http-referer
Just some ideas. Although the best would be to rethink TCP/UDP stack itself, not just the transport-layer.

Nanonymous No.8224 [D] >>8315
>>8110
Something like termbin would suffice for posting/upload. Open connection to server, send arbitrary data, receive location after EOF.
For filesystem traversal and browsing, Gopher is almost perfect, except why do we have gophermaps? They end up being used as hypertext documents anyway, so just use markdown.
There's your complete solution. If you want TLS then stick it behind a relayd.

Nanonymous No.8315 [D]
>>8110
>So how would you structure the HTTP replacement?
I wouldn't. If I wanted to build an imageboard protocol I'd make an imageboard protocol, instead of wrapping messages over some utterly useless shit like HTTP. No not JSON, no not C-LARPer bitjewing bullshit bullshit. I'd take algebraic datatypes and derive prefix encodings from them (you can do this easily in Haskell with the "data/dynamic" whatever the fuck it's called libraries for example).
>>8224
>markdown
jihad yourself nigger

Nanonymous No.8356 [D] >>8875 >>8923
>>8125
The issue with HTML is that we're formatting text to make it harder to read and guaranteeing it won't render right in any display.
I'm not aware of any other document format that succeeds at making text read right anywhere, as such I recommend a plaintext web.
This is why any website you make should be fully enclosed in a <pre></pre> and only ever use the other non-cancer feature in it that is clickable links through href.
HTML is great if you do that.
>b-but muh {useless feature}
ASCII magic can do it
>b-but how will it look right on a 320x640 2 inch screen with rectangular pixels?!?!!?
It's not your fault someone bought a shitty product and tried to read text on something that can't produce human-readable text, But it's certainly your fault that it exists if you allow it by supporting it.


Nanonymous No.8357 [D][U][F] >>8358
File: 0e887123bfabc69792e9ca85e14d954a3c30b4b2ddab201b4c1aa8fbcdf4608b.png (dl) (158.50 KiB)
What if I told you...
that this thread was made by ASUKAFAG?

Nanonymous No.8358 [D]
>>8357
I'd go back to watching golden age anime.
>captcha: needuu

Nanonymous No.8875 [D] >>8923
>>8356
>I'm not aware of any other document format that succeeds at making text read right anywhere
image formats. PNG

Nanonymous No.8923 [D] >>8937
>>8356
the core idea and only useful idea of a markup format, which HTML is an instance of, is a mixture of arbitrary types of elements:
text
tables
images
bullet points
hyperlinks
etc
this bullshit about going back to ASCII is just neckbeard LARP. plain text is horrible garbage and btw is half the reason the web is shit.
>ASCII magic can do it
no, it can't. if you mean metacharacters and other UNIX bullshit, just gfo
>b-but how will it look right on a 320x640 2 inch screen with rectangular pixels?!?!!?
markup is not tied to pixels in any way. one of the first mistakes of the web was pretending otherwise
>>8875
yeah i sure love
>viewing BGR subpixel-rendered shit on my RGB screen
>viewing RGB subpixel-rendered shit on my BGR screen
>viewing any subpixel rendered shit on my shadow mask CRT

Nanonymous No.8937 [D] >>8943 >>8945
>>8923
how about styles? should there be ability in markup language to choose font size and color?
should it be in markup file itself or separate like CSS?

Nanonymous No.8943 [D]
>>8937
I think it should be in separate file, just with a better styling language than CSS.

Nanonymous No.8945 [D] >>9136 >>9153
>>8937
>should there be ability in markup language to choose font size and color?
The page should be able to pick one of a number of different "themes", possibly parametrically, which would determine the font size and color of elements. The user would of course be able to determine how themes were displayed, or even override the website's theme preference with their own.
Programmers, and the shitty excuse for designers that the web has been cursed with, have no place making complex design decisions. They have repeatedly demonstrated themselves to be incapable. Picking a theme to use, when all the themes look good, is about the level of complexity I trust them with.

Nanonymous No.9136 [D] >>9141 >>9169
>color?
No. that's a vulnerability (and annoying as fuck).
>font size
it's none of the conern of articles
>>8945
they dont need themes at all. i cant imagine why a page would choose a theme. i can set the entire theme in my browser myself and i dont see why there should be any more deliberation over this than that
>Picking a theme to use, when all the themes look good, is about the level of complexity I trust them with.
based

Nanonymous No.9141 [D] >>9153 >>9155
>>9136
>they dont need themes at all. i cant imagine why a page would choose a theme
consider at least that every website on the internet, with very few non-satire exceptions, has a custom theme of some sort. This in part because the default style in most web browsers is dogshit, but in large part because different authors intend their writing to be read differently, and build their website's theme around that.

Nanonymous No.9153 [D] >>9158 >>9167
>>8945
The problem we now have are people that used to be limited to picking font size and color, are JavaCrapting websites to the point they've become rube goldberg machines. Having a default theme file, that's user-overridable, doesn't seem bad. It provides a framework to work within, unlike JavaCrapt, which allows webshitters to extend the framework beyond the original intent, usually to the detriment of the user.

>>9141
How is colour a vulnerability?

Nanonymous No.9155 [D][U][F] >>9167
File: 6a14f83d773c205dd49962aec5db2fee3935899ff2d642b5ee121ebd574f9fa6.jpg (dl) (4.58 KiB)
>>9141
Themes are also used to quickly visually distinguish one from another. Similar to why not everyone has the same exact vehicle. Imagine walking into a parking area where all the vehicles look exactly the same.

Nanonymous No.9158 [D] >>9167 >>9169
>>9153
>How is colour a vulnerability?
It becomes an issue whenever you can have the text be the same color as the background. This would be a vulnerability if, for example, someone is copy pasting text from a website to their terminal. The webshotter answer is to tell people never to copy paste anything from websites. A much better answer is to make it impossible for websites to lie to you about what you are copy-pasting.

Nanonymous No.9167 [D] >>9169 >>9229
>This in part because the default style in most web browsers is dogshit,
literally nothing is stopping you from changing it. but nignogs rather spend hours configuring per-site CSS overrides
> but in large part because different authors intend their writing to be read differently, and build their website's theme around that.
it's all bullshit. there is only one way to write websites. <p>paragraph 1</p></p>paragraph 2</p>
>>9153
>how is color a vuln
because websites show annoying colors that hurt your eyes
because websites show tons of blue, which is thought to cause macular degeneration
because the web replacement will allow pages to use any data structure they want instead of just <p>, <table>, <img>, etc, and the renderers for them will be delimited using colors
>>9155
imagine being current year and every car is a plastic shiny piece of shit that reflects sun into your face at absolutely every possible angle you can look at it from. imaine being cucked enough to be able to distinguish one of these cars from the other
>>9158
bullshit. anything that can break due to not knowing what you're pasting into it, is the problem. not the source of the copy. terminals could simply require a return or alt+e or whatever the fuck to execute the currently edited line (inb4 they cant because UNIX braindamage requires them to be broken).

なのにもうす No.9169 [D] >>9170 >>9212
>>9136
>>9158
>>9167
>color is a vulnerability
Here frens you can observe two specimens with a terminal form of minimalism cancer.
It's impossible to heal them at this point sadly.

Nanonymous No.9170 [D] >>9212
>>9169
>bright colors are a zero-day
kek?

>anything that can break due to not knowing what you're pasting into it, is the problem
This is a slave mentality. You've gotten so used to the web being terrible, that you think this is the way it has to be, or worse, you think it is better this way. A web that I can freely copy paste things off of, without needing to dutifully reread it after it's pasted into my terminal, is better than one where that is necessary. Worse still, we could easily travel to that universe, if there was any spirit of innovation left in the web. Instead, we're stuck with the people who think we need more javascript, faster scripting languages, more OS level APIS, and idiots like you who think the solution is to strip everything away and return to the web of 1990.

Another copy pasting issue while I'm here: PDFs. The tarrant one, if you tried copy pasting out of it, was terrible: every pair of letters had a space between them, so all formatting was completely destroyed. This isn't a vulnerability, and I'm sorry I tried to defend you when you said that about colors, but it's shit annoying to deal with. The web is slowly moving towards the exact same thing, as the relationship between what you see on the page, and what is written in the markup, slowly diverges. This is made worse, of course, by scripts that can replace the thing you're copy pasting to prevent people stealing and whatever, but even with scripts off someone could put an invisible box on top of everything, or rearrange the characters in the markup and piece them together in styles, to make copy-pasting impossible. It's little things like this that make HTML as it is today cancer.

にっがるはっごつ No.9212 [D] >>9215
>>9169
nigger this isn't minimalism. instead of wasting colors for clickbait and garbage-themed gnome "apps", we allocate colors to use as syntactic markers.
>>9170
>This is a slave mentality. You've gotten so used to the web being terrible, that you think this is the way it has to be, or worse, you think it is better this way.
nigger i agree with all the anti-webshit stuff you're saying, but the terminal is a vulnerable piece of shit. the fact that something can have a newline and when you paste it into the input box and it causes it to be executed instead of letting you edit it first, is broken as fuck. now on top of that we got all dem metacharacters and shit as well as bugs and C written by kids, which make the problem 3 orders of magnitude worse.
PDF has the exact same copy problem as the web. you can copy something other than what it shows you

Nanonymous No.9215 [D]
>>9212
Another broken thing with copypasting into the terminal is that you can paste in backspaces if I remember correctly. So you could have
rm -r ~/*;\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\b\becho harmless command

Nanonymous No.9229 [D][U][F]
File: affbb34289e0c7a28d62eecd559645a0d8d4e40ad56db0f79a8dbd4934f301d0.png (dl) (201.39 KiB)
>>9167
>terminals could simply require a return or alt+e or whatever the fuck to execute the currently edited line
^U