frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

Shipping WebGPU on Windows in Firefox 141

https://mozillagfx.wordpress.com/2025/07/15/shipping-webgpu-on-windows-in-firefox-141/
81•Bogdanp•3h ago•16 comments

Cloudflare 1.1.1.1 Incident on July 14, 2025

https://blog.cloudflare.com/cloudflare-1-1-1-1-incident-on-july-14-2025/
231•nomaxx117•6h ago•117 comments

Tilck: A Tiny Linux-Compatible Kernel

https://github.com/vvaltchev/tilck
126•chubot•5h ago•24 comments

GPUHammer: Rowhammer attacks on GPU memories are practical

https://gpuhammer.com/
175•jonbaer•9h ago•54 comments

Six Years of Gemini

https://geminiprotocol.net/news/2025_06_20.gmi
131•brson•7h ago•40 comments

Ukrainian hackers destroyed the IT infrastructure of Russian drone manufacturer

https://prm.ua/en/ukrainian-hackers-destroyed-the-it-infrastructure-of-a-russian-drone-manufacturer-what-is-known/
80•doener•1h ago•24 comments

LLM Daydreaming

https://gwern.net/ai-daydreaming
59•nanfinitum•7h ago•19 comments

Documenting what you're willing to support (and not)

https://rachelbythebay.com/w/2025/07/07/support/
22•zdw•3d ago•1 comments

Show HN: Shoggoth Mini – A soft tentacle robot powered by GPT-4o and RL

https://www.matthieulc.com/posts/shoggoth-mini
478•cataPhil•18h ago•91 comments

Hijacking Trust? Bitvise Under Fire for Controlling Domain of FOSS Project PuTTY

https://blog.pupred.com/blog/puttyvsbitvise/
41•ColinWright•3h ago•29 comments

Reflections on OpenAI

https://calv.info/openai-reflections
533•calvinfo•17h ago•303 comments

NIST ion clock sets new record for most accurate clock

https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2025/07/nist-ion-clock-sets-new-record-most-accurate-clock-world
296•voxadam•17h ago•105 comments

Where's Firefox going next?

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/discussions/where-s-firefox-going-next-you-tell-us/m-p/100698#M39094
202•ReadCarlBarks•12h ago•277 comments

Running a million-board chess MMO in a single process

https://eieio.games/blog/a-million-realtime-chess-boards-in-a-single-process/
116•isaiahwp•3d ago•15 comments

I'm Switching to Python and Actually Liking It

https://www.cesarsotovalero.net/blog/i-am-switching-to-python-and-actually-liking-it.html
47•cesarsotovalero•2h ago•59 comments

To be a better programmer, write little proofs in your head

https://the-nerve-blog.ghost.io/to-be-a-better-programmer-write-little-proofs-in-your-head/
336•mprast•16h ago•133 comments

The FIPS 140-3 Go Cryptographic Module

https://go.dev/blog/fips140
147•FiloSottile•13h ago•49 comments

My Family and the Flood

https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/texas-flood-firsthand-account/
162•herbertl•11h ago•57 comments

Algorithms for making interesting organic simulations

https://bleuje.com/physarum-explanation/
63•todsacerdoti•2d ago•6 comments

Congress moves to reject bulk of White House's proposed NASA cuts

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/07/congress-moves-to-reject-bulk-of-white-houses-proposed-nasa-cuts/
151•DocFeind•6h ago•90 comments

The Story of Mel, A Real Programmer, Annotated (1996)

https://users.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/mel-annotated/node1.html#SECTION00010000000000000000
103•fanf2•3d ago•31 comments

The beauty entrepreneur who made the Jheri curl a sensation

https://thehustle.co/originals/the-beauty-entrepreneur-who-made-the-jheri-curl-a-sensation
4•Anon84•2d ago•0 comments

Show HN: Reviving a 20 year old OS X App

https://andrewshaw.nl/blog/reviving-genius
50•shawa_a_a•4d ago•25 comments

Mostly dead influential programming languages (2020)

https://www.hillelwayne.com/post/influential-dead-languages/
159•azhenley•3d ago•101 comments

Plasma Bigscreen rises from the dead with a better UI

https://www.neowin.net/news/kdes-android-tv-alternative-plasma-bigscreen-rises-from-the-dead-with-a-better-ui/
154•bundie•16h ago•59 comments

Nextflow: System for creating scalable, portable, reproducible workflows

https://github.com/nextflow-io/nextflow
14•saikatsg•4h ago•1 comments

Designing for the Eye: Optical corrections in architecture and typography

https://www.nubero.ch/blog/015/
161•ArmageddonIt•16h ago•24 comments

Mira Murati’s AI startup Thinking Machines valued at $12B in early-stage funding

https://www.reuters.com/technology/mira-muratis-ai-startup-thinking-machines-raises-2-billion-a16z-led-round-2025-07-15/
111•spenvo•16h ago•131 comments

Lorem Gibson

http://loremgibson.com/
139•DyslexicAtheist•3d ago•30 comments

LLM Inevitabilism

https://tomrenner.com/posts/llm-inevitabilism/
1583•SwoopsFromAbove•1d ago•1490 comments
Open in hackernews

The FIPS 140-3 Go Cryptographic Module

https://go.dev/blog/fips140
147•FiloSottile•13h ago

Comments

aranw•11h ago
I’m curious to understand what implications this will have on Go and where it is used? How does this differ to other languages as well? I don’t fully understand what it will mean for Go and its community
tptacek•11h ago
None; it's an optional package you use when your users require FIPS 140.
haiku2077•9h ago
It means companies with US government contracts writing Go code can use the standard library crypto package in native Go instead if having to enable CGO and using a crypto library written in C. CGO is kind of a pain in the ass to develop with compared to fully native Go code, especially when cross-compiling (and cross compilation is very common now that ARM is common on both laptops and servers).

This also now makes Go a very convenient language to write US Gov software in.

If you have never heard of FIPS before ignore this entirely and continue to live in happiness.

tptacek•11h ago
It's interesting and kind of neat in an inside-baseball way that the standard Go cryptographic library (already unusual in the major languages for being a soup-to-nuts implementation rather than wrappers around an OpenSSL) is almost fully NIST-validated; in particular, it means vendors who want to sell into FedGov can confidently build with the Go standard library.

Having said all this: nobody should be using crypto/fips140 unless they know specifically why they're doing that. Even in its 140-3 incarnation, FIPS 140 is mostly a genuflection to FedGov idiosyncrasies.

twoodfin•11h ago
Would you say there’s a brown M&M’s aspect (intentional or otherwise) to FIPS-140, or is it all just bowing to the sovereign for his indulgences?
YawningAngel•10h ago
Not really. It isn't hard to use FIPS validated software, it's just annoying to do because most libraries you would want to use aren't FIPS compliant by default for good reasons. If you can get a government contract in the first place you are already administratively competent enough to use FIPS.
tptacek•10h ago
Yeah, I don't think there's any malice to any of this; FIPS is just the product of a particularly conservative (backwards-looking, path-dependent) and market-unaccountable standards process. It's like what would happen if JPMC had so much market power that they could make their own cryptographic standard; it would, I am saying, suck ass, without anyone meaning for it to.
EvanAnderson•9h ago
> If you can get a government contract in the first place you are already administratively competent enough to use FIPS.

Speaking as a sysadmin for a local government roped into FIPS requirements by way of FBI CJIS compliance I can safely say your assumption of competence is incorrect.

LtWorf•3h ago
> If you can get a government contract in the first place you are already administratively competent enough to use FIPS.

My personal experience disagrees.

FiloSottile•10h ago
> Applications that have no need for FIPS 140-3 compliance can safely ignore [this page], and should not enable FIPS 140-3 mode.

https://go.dev/doc/security/fips140

Yup.

chrisabrams•10h ago
> Having said all this: nobody should be using crypto/fips140 unless they know specifically why they're doing that. Even in its 140-3 incarnation, FIPS 140 is mostly a genuflection to FedGov idiosyncrasies.

What should folks use then?

tptacek•10h ago
crypto/, not crypto/fips140.
FiloSottile•10h ago
To nitpick, there is no special crypto/fips140 package. (Ok, there is, but it just has an Enabled() bool function.)

FIPS 140-3 mode is enabled by building with GOFIPS140=v1.0.0 (or similar, see https://go.dev/doc/security/fips140), but it shares 99% of the code with non-FIPS mode.

Still, your message is right, just GOFIPS140=off (the default!), not GOFIPS140=v1.0.0.

tptacek•7h ago
Not a nitpick! I was just wrong!
bravesoul2•57m ago
That's a nice solution when managing a platform. You can "upgrade" all your teams, and/or easily detect they have upgraded.
3eb7988a1663•6h ago
Does that mean it might be easier, regardless of language, to shell out to your cryptographic Go binary rather than deal with OpenSSL? I dislike a lot of Go, but they have been pretty good about backwards compatibility.
tialaramex•18m ago
> already unusual in the major languages for being a soup-to-nuts implementation rather than wrappers around an OpenSSL

What does "Soup-to-nuts" require in this context? Should I expect that Go has for some reason re-implemented the x86-64 machine code to do ChaCha20 or do you still consider it a "Soup-to-nuts" implementation if they reuse the same machine code for this that you'd find in everybody else's implementation so long as they wrote their own wrapper code ?

Unlike say compression there's no real room in these core features to innovate. You can't pick different "nothing up my sleeve" numbers, you can't can't offer more parametrisation, anything like that would be an incompatibility - it's intentionally a standardized component.

hamburglar•11h ago
This is huge. I’ve spent years jumping through hoops to get Go projects signed off for FIPS-140 and I always worried that something was going to go wrong and we’d have a compliance nightmare on our hands. They just made it super easy.
dangoodmanUT•10h ago
I think this was in MS Go before, right?
FiloSottile•10h ago
No, the Go 1.24 native module effort that they talk about in https://devblogs.microsoft.com/go/go-1-24-fips-update/ is this effort, which Microsoft was not involved in. We simply decided to delay the official announcement until the module reached the In Process list.

The system libraries approach used by Microsoft Go is cgo based IIUC, and I think derived from Go+BoringCrypto. I understand they are working on migrating their bindings to fit better downstream of the new native mode.

dadrian•10h ago
If DOGE had done nothing other than get rid of FIPS validation, the GDP unlock alone would have solved the debt problem.
dlock17•10h ago
Companies don't need any additional reasons to skimp out on security.

The money could probably be more wisely spent if not following FIPS but without FIPS the average company wouldn't direct that money towards security at all.

tptacek•10h ago
No. FIPS has literally nothing to do with security.
dlock17•9h ago
I may be thinking more about FedRAMP in general rather than just FIPS140-3, but mandating things like keeping user passwords out of logs is a security improvement.

And the average company needs to be dragged kicking and screaming to care about security at all.

tptacek•9h ago
This is about exclusively using "validated" implementations of specific cryptographic constructions. You can avoid it simply by not encrypting stuff at all, which is an indication of how little it has to do with security.
hamandcheese•8h ago
> You can avoid it simply by not encrypting stuff at all, which is an indication of how little it has to do with security.

The consequences of encrypting wrongly quite possibly are worse than if you never encrypted at all.

tptacek•8h ago
Good thing FIPS 140 does virtually nothing to prevent cryptographic vulnerabilities, then.
Spooky23•6h ago
Remember when HN was losing its collective mind over Dual_EC_DRBG? That was delivered to customers with a FIPS validated software stack.
hamandcheese•2h ago
Both of these things can be true at the same time:

- "Don't use unproven cryptography" is a reasonable policy.

- Policymaking can be subverted by bad actors.

tguvot•6h ago
fedramp requires to encrypt a bunch of stuff
Spooky23•6h ago
FedRAMP is more a cheatsheet for compliance people. Someone in a federal agency had an auditor validate that the required NIST controls were done.

The most useful thing about FIPS 140 is that it’s a great way of quickly identifying clueless security people.

thayne•5h ago
> but mandating things like keeping user passwords out of logs is a security improvement.

That has nothing to do with FIPS 140.

FIPS 140 is just requirements for "cryptographic modules".

It specifies which algorithms are allowed and requires that you use modules that have been "validated" by going through an expensive and slow auditing process.

While I don't think it is completely useless to have those requirements, it has some problems, such as:

- it takes a very long time for anything to get validated. For example, Ubuntu 22.04 only recently got its crypto packages validated after being "in process" for years.

- bug fixes have to go through the validation process too, so if a vulnerability is found, you can be left vulnerable for a while

- For many languages and runtimes, using FIPS certified modules is a royal pain. For example, for several versions of node, there was no good way to run it in a FIPS compatible way, because it required a newer version of openssl than the latest FIPS certified version. AWS lambdas, even in GovCloud don't include FIPS certified crypto, so you have to bundle it in your package and make sure to use your local library instead of the system library, which can be quite difficult depending on the language. Prior to this change in go, using FIPS in go required using cgo to link to a FIPS certified c library, and make sure you either did some fancy link magic to get any libraries you used to also use that, or don't use any libraries that use the standard crypto library.

- It doesn't include many algorithms that are widely used and generally considered secure including Ed25519, chacha20-poly1305, argon (along scrypt, bcrypt, etc.), etc. This can cause problems with compatibility with other systems.

__bjoernd•4h ago
Luckily, FedRAMP have updated their FIPS guidance just this year to allow using crypto modules that have been validated and then received security patches. They realized that security patching is important and you don't need to recertify every patch before using it anymore.

https://www.fedramp.gov/rev5/fips/

dchest•2h ago
FYI, Ed25519 is now included.
jandrewrogers•3h ago
This has relatively little to do with actual security. It is compliance and certification theater for the most part. In many cases you can avoid it entirely by outsourcing caring about it to the customer. This isn’t always a bad thing; sometimes they understand and can deliver on their requirements much better than you can.
api•8h ago
Doesn’t it at least keep snake oil crypto out of government? If it were removed it should be replaced by something. No standard would lead to a lot of crap being deployed.
akerl_•8h ago
It’s way better at preventing usage of modern crypto than it is at blocking snake oil.
tptacek•8h ago
A lot of FIPS-compatible crap is already deployed, and our most secure and trusted cryptography generally wasn't created under any standards regime.
thayne•7h ago
I wouldn't say nothing. It is intended to ensure some level of security. And in some ways it can lead to decreased security if you comply with it (for example, if a vulnerability is found in your crypto library, you have to wait for the fix to be "validated" before you can patch it).

But yeah, complying with FIPS doesn't necessarily mean you are secure, and it is definitely possible to be secure without being FIPS compliant.

tptacek•6h ago
FIPS-140 doesn't even speak to most cryptographic vulnerabilities; it could prevent you from using, like, the PKZip cipher rather than AES, but not (really) from having code that could be induced into reusing a GCM nonce.

It is of no security value.

tguvot•6h ago
fedramp as of last year allows to use not fips validated version in order to patch security vulnerabilities
firesteelrain•10h ago
Does the use of the library in your application still require the application itself to be FIPS validated? This just makes it a little easier to go through full, validated NIST compliance, right?.
FiloSottile•10h ago
[ Big I am a cryptographer, not your cryptographer disclaimer ]

It depends, but if you are targeting Security Level 1 (which is what most folks think about when they think about FIPS 140) you generally don't need your entire application to be validated, only the cryptographic module.

So (again, depending on your requirements and on the Operating Environment you deploy to and on what algorithms you use and how) setting GOFIPS140 might actually be all you need to do.

firesteelrain•10h ago
Thank you. I will remember this the next time this comes up at work
bradfitz•9h ago
Congrats, Filippo!
midocon•9h ago
This is at est!
justincormack•54m ago
Yes its been a long journey since the early boringssl versions a decade ago.
midocon•9h ago
This is a test
SAI_Peregrinus•8h ago
The "Uncompromising Security" section[1] is particularly interesting to me. FIPS-140 compliance usually leads to reduced security, but it looks like the Go team found ways around the main janky bits. It's nice that there's now a FIPS-140 module for FedRAMP that doesn't require avoiding VMs to stay secure, for example.

[1] https://go.dev/blog/fips140#uncompromising-security