Rick_C137 @ Rick_C137 @programming.dev

Posts

55

Comments

64

Joined

2 yr. ago

Something worth reading regarding Systemd https://www.devuan.org/os/announce/ Cheers.

I've gave a longer trial to gpg4win and it's very power full and easy to use ! Of course it's pointless to use such a nice tool on a none air-gaped Windows..

For the others there is Gnu-Linux :)

I've received a lot of reactions on the original post: https://programming.dev/post/10465121

But if someone is involved with the development of Thunderbird I think this is worth reading: https://programming.dev/comment/7677398

For my part I will use the OpenPGP sigin tools for now.

Cheers.

Thank you all for your quick reactions !!

To summarize if I want to use the PDF built-in signing I will need to convert my OpenPGP into a X.509 cert otherwise I can simply use the OpenPGP file signing

I want to stick to the UNIX Philosophy especially:

Write programs that do one thing and do it well.

So I will use the OpenPGP signing tool :)

Thanks !

You can interact with the HTML DOM with Python !!!!!

Thanks all for your input.

My only workaround was to check programmatically all those input and set them with a setCustomValidity()

Too bad there isn't a method to relaunch the validity across all the page :/

Cheers

Thank @daisyKutter@lemmy.ml

it's look like that that code only verify the form when submitting.. I need to check the validity when the element has been loaded.

btw checkValidity() do not solve this issue as it return True when the length is longer than maxlength ! O_o I guess this is were is lying the "bug"

Thank you @coffee_poops@sh.itjust.works that exactly my question.. how can I trigger the validation process again ?

It will not be digest to send all what I use for you to see it (it will lead to TL;DR)

but here an elements (loaded with XHR that give the problem

 html

So normally this element should be invalid and a CSS selector of :invalid should match. but it's not the case because the browser seem to not run the validation check on loaded elements... !?

if we edit manually the input , for example removing one character then the validation process kick-in and the CSS selector work etc..

Hey @hatedbad@lemmy.sdf.org

Thanks for your output, but RSA seem to not be recommended anymore, dig on a search engine..

@crystal@feddit.de I didn't know about GrapheneOS too bad it only work Pixel phones (that are also owned by Google ! ) So If I'm against Google for all what they do https://degooglisons-internet.org/en/ I'll certainly not give them money !

(Finding and importing a phone is something you have to do even when using the stock OS.)

True, but you will do it multiple time if the phone that your looking for doesn't have an available ROM somewhere..

Has I found nothing, I've write a piece of code in Python 🐍 ! and compile it for Windows..

Thank you @Vilian@lemmy.ca Seem great, I'll keep it for later :)

But not for what I need now, as

Mutt is a small but very powerful text-based mail client for Unix operating systems

and it's a "full" client, I need just the SMTP functionality.

OMG that too bad ! Lemmy that is federated and LOSS use github to track the bugs :/ Too bad I don't have an account. So anyone, feel free to report this bug. Thanks.

see my comment in the original post ( https://programming.dev/post/6111023) for more info on the suspected bug.

ok I manage to send my post ! (it look like a lemmy bug... , do you know where to report it ? )

it seem that lemmy didn't support the following

and weirdly, I can post here...

not yet, I didn't find enough documentation about that topic.

If the computer of the Visitor is already compromised ! your simulation can stop there I think...

My scenario assume that the visitor computer is not compromised.

But let say his traffic get intercepted. Sure a hacker can send his PubKey (2) but in (3) the visitor (should) have already the PubKey of one (or few) verification server. So it should not be possible for an hacker to interfer with the communication (3) right ?

and what about something like this.

1. The visitor connect on the website
2. he receive the public key
3. The key ( it's hash ) is compared with at least two "verification" server , if they all return a positive match, the visitor can use the pub key to initiate.

The "verification servers" grab the public key directly from the Web server.

Any suggestions, ideas ?