frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

OpenCiv3: Open-source, cross-platform reimagining of Civilization III

https://openciv3.org/
391•klaussilveira•5h ago•85 comments

The Waymo World Model

https://waymo.com/blog/2026/02/the-waymo-world-model-a-new-frontier-for-autonomous-driving-simula...
750•xnx•10h ago•459 comments

Monty: A minimal, secure Python interpreter written in Rust for use by AI

https://github.com/pydantic/monty
118•dmpetrov•5h ago•49 comments

Show HN: Look Ma, No Linux: Shell, App Installer, Vi, Cc on ESP32-S3 / BreezyBox

https://github.com/valdanylchuk/breezydemo
131•isitcontent•5h ago•14 comments

Show HN: I spent 4 years building a UI design tool with only the features I use

https://vecti.com
234•vecti•7h ago•113 comments

Dark Alley Mathematics

https://blog.szczepan.org/blog/three-points/
28•quibono•4d ago•2 comments

A century of hair samples proves leaded gas ban worked

https://arstechnica.com/science/2026/02/a-century-of-hair-samples-proves-leaded-gas-ban-worked/
57•jnord•3d ago•3 comments

Microsoft open-sources LiteBox, a security-focused library OS

https://github.com/microsoft/litebox
302•aktau•11h ago•152 comments

Sheldon Brown's Bicycle Technical Info

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/
304•ostacke•11h ago•82 comments

Show HN: If you lose your memory, how to regain access to your computer?

https://eljojo.github.io/rememory/
160•eljojo•8h ago•121 comments

Hackers (1995) Animated Experience

https://hackers-1995.vercel.app/
377•todsacerdoti•13h ago•214 comments

Show HN: R3forth, a ColorForth-inspired language with a tiny VM

https://github.com/phreda4/r3
44•phreda4•4h ago•7 comments

An Update on Heroku

https://www.heroku.com/blog/an-update-on-heroku/
305•lstoll•11h ago•230 comments

I spent 5 years in DevOps – Solutions engineering gave me what I was missing

https://infisical.com/blog/devops-to-solutions-engineering
100•vmatsiiako•10h ago•34 comments

How to effectively write quality code with AI

https://heidenstedt.org/posts/2026/how-to-effectively-write-quality-code-with-ai/
167•i5heu•8h ago•127 comments

Learning from context is harder than we thought

https://hy.tencent.com/research/100025?langVersion=en
138•limoce•3d ago•76 comments

Understanding Neural Network, Visually

https://visualrambling.space/neural-network/
223•surprisetalk•3d ago•29 comments

FORTH? Really!?

https://rescrv.net/w/2026/02/06/associative
36•rescrv•12h ago•17 comments

I now assume that all ads on Apple news are scams

https://kirkville.com/i-now-assume-that-all-ads-on-apple-news-are-scams/
956•cdrnsf•14h ago•413 comments

Introducing the Developer Knowledge API and MCP Server

https://developers.googleblog.com/introducing-the-developer-knowledge-api-and-mcp-server/
8•gfortaine•2h ago•0 comments

PC Floppy Copy Protection: Vault Prolok

https://martypc.blogspot.com/2024/09/pc-floppy-copy-protection-vault-prolok.html
7•kmm•4d ago•0 comments

Evaluating and mitigating the growing risk of LLM-discovered 0-days

https://red.anthropic.com/2026/zero-days/
33•lebovic•1d ago•11 comments

I'm going to cure my girlfriend's brain tumor

https://andrewjrod.substack.com/p/im-going-to-cure-my-girlfriends-brain
30•ray__•1h ago•6 comments

Claude Composer

https://www.josh.ing/blog/claude-composer
97•coloneltcb•2d ago•68 comments

The Oklahoma Architect Who Turned Kitsch into Art

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2026-01-31/oklahoma-architect-bruce-goff-s-wild-home-desi...
17•MarlonPro•3d ago•2 comments

Show HN: Smooth CLI – Token-efficient browser for AI agents

https://docs.smooth.sh/cli/overview
76•antves•1d ago•56 comments

Show HN: Slack CLI for Agents

https://github.com/stablyai/agent-slack
37•nwparker•1d ago•8 comments

How virtual textures work

https://www.shlom.dev/articles/how-virtual-textures-really-work/
23•betamark•12h ago•22 comments

Evolution of car door handles over the decades

https://newatlas.com/automotive/evolution-car-door-handle/
38•andsoitis•3d ago•61 comments

The Beauty of Slag

https://mag.uchicago.edu/science-medicine/beauty-slag
27•sohkamyung•3d ago•3 comments
Open in hackernews

HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS)

https://hstspreload.org/
42•arunc•1mo ago

Comments

tialaramex•1mo ago
I think we're probably at the endgame where ordinary people start to benefit from HTTPS-by-default. Ten years ago it was way too annoying for me to even suggest to my mother that she should have this, although I did use it myself because I understand the caveats, but today "We don't have HTTPS" either means you don't really support web browsers (e.g. some protocols deliberately are HTTP-based but don't use TLS and some even can't if they wanted to) or that the whole site is mothballed so if it didn't have TLS in 2015 it still doesn't today.

As we transition ordinary users to HTTPS-by-default the HSTS feature loses importance. The target audience for HSTS isn't me, or the package management software I run, or some Python code using requests, it's my mother and sister and other ordinary users, and so if they increasingly have HTTPS-by-default then HSTS stops mattering.

JoshTriplett•1mo ago
I've been running not just HTTPS-by-default but strict HTTPS-only for a while now. Firefox, at least, mostly even handles things like captive portals correctly. Judging by the rarity of encountering anything that has HTTP and doesn't listen on HTTPS, I think we're to the point where any non-technical user could use an HTTPS-only configuration and correctly treat any site that doesn't work with it as broken.
aargh_aargh•1mo ago
Honest question/thought - at this point where we have all HTTP requests for a site just redirecting everything to HTTPS, we use HSTS and browsers default to trying https when scheme is not given, why don't we just stop serving on port 80 altogether? Why even bother with HSTS?
Ellipsis753•1mo ago
Old links to your site might still be http - HSTS prevents that request being in the clear. Also, if you have a man-in-the-middle attack, it doesn't matter if you return a redirect or not as the attacker has already replaced your site with a phishing attack instead of a redirect. HSTS prevents this.
RamRodification•1mo ago
Your second example would also be prevented by just not serving on port 80 as the parent comment suggests, no?
meindnoch•1mo ago
>no?

No.

ycombinatrix•1mo ago
No, not really. You can still be MITMed on port 80.
RamRodification•1mo ago
Right. Clients (web browsers) would have to stop using it too for it to work I guess.
toast0•1mo ago
A MITM can intercept the SYNs to port 80 and send their own SYN+ACK.

Not serving on port 80 means a passive viewer won't see any content, but if you were just serving a redirect, there's not much content to see.

IMHO, if you use HSTS preload and you prime HSTS by serving your favicon with https and HSTS, you can go ahead and serve your (unauthenticated) content with http. A modern browser will switch over to https; a MITM could fetch your https pages and return them over http; and you'll be accessible on ancient browsers that can't manage modern TLS.

tetha•1mo ago
I have a few internal services on which I like to crank transport security to 11. No port 80, only TLS 1.3, only modern ciphers. You'd be surprised how much confusion not opening port 80 caused across technical people. And I've learned a bunch of things about supported TLS versions and supported ciphers of windows server versions from this crusade.

And that's with experienced admins and developers. Doing this with our average B2B customer? Hah, oh dear.

tptacek•1mo ago
The answer to this question is interesting, and it's that not serving HTTP doesn't actually help. The attacker HTTPS contemplates controls whether victims see SYN+ACK packets in response to their 80/tcp SYNs. TCP itself isn't authenticated. So you need something "sticky" in the browser to remind it not to try 80/tcp, and thus risk being bamboozled by a MITM attacker.
dxdm•1mo ago
> The attacker HTTPS contemplates controls whether victims see SYN+ACK packets in response to their 80/tcp SYNs.

This informationally dense and adventurously worded sentence is the kind that you can only understand if you already understand it, it feels like. I certainly can't unpack it without getting my hiking gear on. Not this rainy morning, though, may the transport layer gods forgive me.

vluft•1mo ago
if an attacker is in the position to try to MITM TLS, they're in the position to just serve whatever they want on port 80 even if your server isn't doing that.
tptacek•1mo ago
They can't all be winners!
dxdm•1mo ago
Thanks for sending them on their way regardless. It does tend to move things forward.
tptacek•1mo ago
Like a good dose of dietary fiber.
gwbas1c•1mo ago
IMO: The right time to ask this question is when all browsers default to HTTPS; instead we should ask why browsers default to http instead of https.

IE: I just typed "google.com" into Brave and it made a request to http://google.com which responded with a 307 redirect to https://google.com, which then made a 301 redirect to https://www.google.com.

hex-m•1mo ago
Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Edge and even Brave have "HTTPS first" or "HTTPS by default" enabled out of the box. HTTP is only used as a fallback.
gwbas1c•1mo ago
Then why did mine do http first? Use the F12 screen to watch your browser resolve a domain that you type into the address bar.
baobun•1mo ago
Why are you saying lies?

I just installed fresh chromium and firefox in a clean Linux VM and typed "google.com" (and a few others) in the URL bar with tcpdump running and they both initiated with TCP port 80. Can confirm that the https-only setting is disabled for both when looking in settings/preferences.

> HTTP is only used as a fallback.

Separately, using HTTP as fallback makes the whole thing mostly pointless security-wise. If an attacker can MitM port 80 it is very likely that they can also interfere with 443 to silently force a protocol downgrade. STRIPTLS.

SMTP STARTTLS has the same problem. ISPs and authorities have been known to harvest email traffic by the same technique.

We don't really need HSTS to address most scenarios. Just have browser not attempt http:// for addresses in the address bar unless explicitly specified. Have it try https:// without falling back to http://.

HTTPS-by-default with fallback is not a good default setting since it's vulnerable to the above attack. Strict HTTPS-only is not a good default setting since it prevents legitimate http traffic on internal networks. HSTS adds problematic edge-cases. It's hard to fathom that none of the major browser vendors seem to have figured out the obvious solution to just stop inferring http:// unless asked for.

gwbas1c•1mo ago
Really, the only time I use "http" is for running web services on my localhost for debugging, to connect to my router, and to connect to my NAS.

I'm not sure the best way to secure that situation. Unencrypted traffic that only stays on my own computer is a valid use case, and unencrypted traffic on my home network is about as risky as skinny dipping in your own back yard.

ozim•1mo ago
Just wait a bit and there will be some TLS denialism spawning here.

For a lot stuff on my local network I don’t want the hassle and there are loads of use cases in local networks for normal people to just have port 80 no certs on something like 192.x.x.x because there is no easy way to set up public certificates for that and I don’t want everything hostem on cloud - some stuff I want to still host for myself in my local network.

Corporations or companies should not do that - even internal networks should have proper certs and encryption but it also is not that easy.

Stuff sent over the internet for others to see should have TLS always because you don’t know where your packets travel.

9029•1mo ago
> For a lot stuff on my local network I don’t want the hassle and there are loads of use cases in local networks for normal people to just have port 80 no certs on something like 192.x.x.x because there is no easy way to set up public certificates for that and I don’t want everything hostem on cloud - some stuff I want to still host for myself in my local network.

Tbh I don't see what's hard about this. All you need is an A record pointing to your 192.x.x.x, acme capable dns host and a modern reverse proxy. You can even use a free ddns service if you want. Wouldn't bother with this for development, but anything hosted for longer than a few days absolutely yes. Imo not getting browser warnings is alone worth the few minutes it takes nowadays.

dmitrygr•1mo ago
“ All you need is an A record pointing to your 192.x.x.x, acme capable dns host and a modern reverse proxy”. That’s a LOT more than socket(), listen(), and accept().
SahAssar•1mo ago
> All you need is an A record pointing to your 192.x.x.x, acme capable dns host and a modern reverse proxy

And to distribute keys that allow those appliances to update the DNS records, to secure those keys, have an a way to install those keys (and update/rotate them), and make sure your DNS host is supported by your acme client.

ozim•1mo ago
XD

I can yeah it is easy but I have 20 years of experience.

I don’t want to spend time setting that up.

For less technically capable people you just lost them in first sentence.

gucci-on-fleek•1mo ago
> For a lot stuff on my local network I don’t want the hassle […] because there is no easy way to set up public certificates

Everything on my home network uses publicly-trusted certs from LE, including my router with only 8MB of flash and 128MB of memory. You need to use the DNS challenges if you don't want the services to be publicly accessible, but you can run ACME on nearly everything these days.

ozim•1mo ago
Neat part is that’s my local network and I don’t want to spend time doing that.

I’d much rather spend time arguing about it on HN.

That’s the neat part of “it is my time” and I want to use it the way I want.

It doesn’t apply to stuff I publish over the internet all personal pages blogs have https, that’s not negotiable.

gucci-on-fleek•1mo ago
Fair enough. The only reason that I bothered setting up HTTPS certificates in my home network was because I was using a domain where I had previously enabled HSTS. I was wasn't very enthusiastic about it when I first added the certificates, but once I figured it out, I appreciated seeing a little padlock when I logged in to my router. That's essentially the only benefit though, so I certainly don't blame you for not wanting to go through the effort to set it up.
Arbortheus•1mo ago
It would be nice. Our security team started complaining that we serve a 301 redirect on port 80 for our website (just like 99.9% of websites do... sigh) and wanted port 80 shut down.

To appease them, I switched the redirect off in dev/staging, and soon enough even devs are having trouble accessing the site because they type 'website.com' and that can't resolve, only 'https://website.com' can.

(And before you say it, yes we use HSTS, but I presume there were some scenarios where that wasn't already cached/hit).

dspillett•1mo ago
For new sites that is definitely practical. Modern versions of Chrom{e|ium} & Firefox (and other browsers based on them) have defaulted to HTTPS when the protocol is not specified. The only potential issue is if users do specify the protocol and leave the S out, it would be good for browsers to try HTTPS when HTTP fails (though only if it completely fails to connect).
baobun•1mo ago
> Modern versions of Chrom{e|ium} & Firefox (and other browsers based on them) have defaulted to HTTPS when the protocol is not specified.

This is not true but it would be nice if it was.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46443199

dspillett•1mo ago
Hmm. I am perhaps confusing announced plans, and the effect of the HSTS preload lists, with actually released changes to defaults.

I'll have to install some fresh VMs and see what behaviour I get out-of-the-box with no HSTS cache (and sites not on the preload lists) on various OSs, to correct my understanding.

kiririn•1mo ago
Even with default https etc, HSTS still adds some defence against MITM - browsers won’t let you even forcibly accept a self signed certificate
AlotOfReading•1mo ago
The number of MITM attacks that's thwarted for me remains zero, while sites forgetting to renew their certs despite setting HSTS is a fairly regular occurrence.
zeeZ•1mo ago
Not being able to access the web interface where you have to manually upload a new certificate due to HSTS and the old certificate having expired a couple hours ago...
kiririn•1mo ago
Yeah it’s more of an annoyance for sure. I only discovered it was a thing when intentionally MITMing a domain on my router
evanjrowley•1mo ago
Microsoft Edge Version 142.0.3595.65 on macOS does not default to HTTPS, FWIW. Users accessing sites that do not redirect HTTP to HTTPS must specify the full URL, at least in my experience from 2024-2025.
arccy•1mo ago
it's a note at the very end, but there are TLDs like .dev where all domains under it have HTTPS enforced.
tialaramex•1mo ago
Specifically .dev has HSTS pre-loaded everywhere. But that's not the same thing as HTTPS enforced. There are protocols built on HTTP which can't do TLS, those also don't obey HSTS (it would be pointless) and so they work fine on .dev as do HTTP services for non-humans who also needn't obey HSTS and presumably already understand the consequences.
ocdtrekkie•1mo ago
HSTS remains a broken antifeature which violates the covenant of a browser agent being a browser agent. (A server should never have more authority than me on dictating how my agent works.)

Firefox refuses to support the ability to bypass HSTS which generally means I'm forced to use a different browser when HSTS is getting in the way of me doing my job.

(Thankfully or unfortunately, Chromium-based browsers violate the HSTS spec and allow bypass. But there seems to be no appetite to actually repair the HSTS spec to permit this.)

SkyPuncher•1mo ago
When does HSTS get in your way?
ycombinatrix•1mo ago
When I'm unable to turn it off.
ocdtrekkie•1mo ago
Most commonly when fixing certificate errors! A lot of modern web applications have all of their certificate configuration in the web interface... which you can't access when your certificate breaks. I think once I had to break out IE11 to fix a certificate because Firefox wouldn't let me...

But also sometimes I need to access a website where the certificate lapsed yesterday. This is not a security issue and no reasonable person would assume a certificate expired yesterday is compromised, but we are living in a world of madness. I am not going to wait for some third party to fix their site, I'm just going to circumvent HSTS, I have better things to do.

SkyPuncher•1mo ago
Ah, that makes sense.
winstonwinston•1mo ago
> Chromium-based browsers violate the HSTS spec and allow bypass.

If you were able to bypass HSTS using google chrome, that sounds like a bug.

precommunicator•1mo ago
you can type "thisisunsafe" on HSTS error page to bypass