Killing_Spark

joined 1 year ago
[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 87 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (11 children)

Did you just expect people that call random devs at random times to actually read any information on a website?

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 2 points 3 months ago

Rest Barbarian for more bonk

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)
[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 2 points 3 months ago

You didn't though. You replied to me saying this:

What did Clinton do? You mean aside from keeping his mouth shut about being offered an underage girl?

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

In this specific case I agree, not reporting CSA should be illegal (and probably is?) I'm not so sure that we should codify the current ethical understanding into law though.

We need to leave room for development. Forcing new ideas to first go through the battle of legalization isn't helpful in this regard. Laws are there to regulate what normal social regulation can't do properly.

I think people who cheat on their partners are morally speaking bad people. But writing into law you can't have multiple partners at once is quite obviously a bad decision, because there are happy polyamourus relationships. The government doesn't need to get involved here, being treated like the ass that you are for cheating is punishment enough, and leaves the room for developing new ways of living together.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 38 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Bro the guy was literally "the leader of the free world" and said nothing about his friend selling children to child diddlers and you are going to come at me with a "but akchually WHICH LAW DID HE BREAK?!?!?!?". Go piss.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 27 points 3 months ago (13 children)

What did Clinton do? You mean aside from keeping his mouth shut about being offered an underage girl?

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 4 points 3 months ago

The point being trump would set the bar very low anyways

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 8 points 3 months ago (4 children)

It's not like trump is known to not stoop below any bar he sees. Holding the bar up won't do anything

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 2 points 3 months ago

You know what I never had a picture of a silly goose in my head. But now I do. Thanks!

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 2 points 3 months ago

Well I hope she's afraid of them now.

[–] Killing_Spark@feddit.de 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If that was a real card I would have hated the font of that 23 so hard

 

The context I came upon this question is dbus filedescriptor passing but the question is valid more broadly. Assume you are implementing some service that is supposed to receive some kind of filedescriptor for client processes. You get a message that is in some kind or another malformed but you have already received the filedescriptor.

What do you do with that fd? Is close()ing it guaranteed to be enough?

The question was sparked by a safety comment on rusts abstraction of a OwnedFd, which will run close() in its destructor and binds you by contract to only create it from a filedescriptor if close is all that is needed for cleanup.

This of course made me worry about the possibility of malicious clients sending special filedescriptors that accumulate some kind of ressource on the server process causing some kind of DOS.

I guess a secondary question is: Do you know any example where calling close() is not enough?

view more: next ›