Comments for jwiltshire.org.uk

Comment on X-RaceProtection: yes by Elessar

Elessar — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 07:37:12 +0000

Good idea, but does the X- prefix for experimental stuff not have been deprecated?

Comment on X-RaceProtection: yes by Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 01:35:05 +0000

The idea makes sense in principle, but the name of the header doesn’t do a good job of conveying its meaning. You only want to use this when making the obvious reply, such as “done” or “processed” or “handled”, as opposed to any form of substantive response. Also, RFC6648 deprecated the use of the “X-” prefix. Thus, I’d suggest a header name like “ObviousReply” instead, with the same semantics.

You might also consider a couple of additional flags, space-separated from the “yes” or Message-Id. First, if either the earlier or later mail has the keyword “checksum-unquoted” in ObviousReply, the system processing the mail should only drop later mails in favor of earlier ones if the unquoted (non-’>’-prefixed) text of both messages matches exactly, modulo whitespace and with standard signature dropping (“– “). Second, if ObviousReply includes the keyword “symmetric”, both mails must include the ObviousReply header to get dropped; that seems like a reasonable quid-pro-quo for using the header, enforcing that either party believes that they’ve written the obvious message and wouldn’t mind having their message dropped in favor of another.

Comment on From building to demolishing by Matthew W.S. Bell

Matthew W.S. Bell — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 17:00:36 +0000

That wiring is in an electrical safe zone, and, as such, does not require capping. I believe it might be required to be further from the surface, however.

Comment on From building to demolishing by Nick

Nick — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 14:45:10 +0000

For what it’s worth, there’s nothing in the wiring regs about protecting cables in that kind of situation – there are defined “safe zones” in a line above and below a socket which people are expected not to try and put a drill through.

Comment on From building to demolishing by Jon

Jon — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 13:00:42 +0000

Well, there was a large slab of wood on top to make a sideboard, but it had zero storage capacity. I didn’t take a photo of it before I took it out, since at that stage I was just having a look inside (I got a bit carried away).

Comment on From building to demolishing by Elessar

Elessar — Mon, 13 Aug 2012 12:51:40 +0000

Neat work. You say this wall was just eating space for decorative purpose? There is at least one architect that deserved some slaps…

Comment on I’m probably not going to DebConf12 by Gunnar

Gunnar — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 23:09:05 +0000

Oh, hold please a day, two max, before deciding!

I am not part of the travel sponsorship team – But I know they were making their best to send out the first batch of results now.

Comment on StartSSL: finally, a trustworthy certifier* by Brad

Brad — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 20:44:56 +0000

They’re back up, no false certs issued or private keys stolen. more info here.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/21/startssl_security_breach/

amazing to me how little the company bothered to communication their situation. I have a class2 cert with them and would certainly want their assurance that docs I provided them were not compromised / stolen etc.

Comment on StartSSL: finally, a trustworthy certifier* by Corsac

Corsac — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 06:35:59 +0000

Hmhm, advertising StartSSL might not have been a good idea, they’ve just been compromised:

Due to a security breach that occurred at the 15th of June, issuance of digital certificates and related services has been suspended. Our services will remain offline until further notice.

Subscribers and holders of valid certificates are not affected in any form.

Visitors to web sites and other parties relying on valid certificates are not affected.

We apologize for the temporary inconvenience and thank you for your understanding.

Comment on StartSSL: finally, a trustworthy certifier* by Kint

Kint — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 22:43:51 +0000

http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/Attack-on-Israeli-Certificate-Authority-1264008.html