Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by nathankleyn on Monday August 24, 2015 @04:26AM (#10108536)

Almost certainly not, if only because it's another layer of indirection when debugging and for this use you're not limited by distribution size.

There is a potential benefit if the minifier can apply some performance optimisations, but one would hope V8 et al are already doing most of these and more.

Even for client-side applications, HTTP2 + Web Assembly will eradicate concatenating and minifying JS files soon.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by bcrypt on Monday August 24, 2015 @04:50AM (#10108597)

OP here. Agree there probably isn't much benefit to minifying server-side code. However, I wouldn't be surprised if things like Closure Compiler were useful server-side.

Not convinced that HTTP2 will eradicate minifiers; it makes bundling files less useful, but minifying still gets rid of bytes. Then again, I'm not a web performance expert. :)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by nathankleyn on Monday August 24, 2015 @05:00AM (#10108622)

Sorry, that's a mistake - I meant to write "HTTP2 + Web Assembly" (which will take the place of file concatenation and minification).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by gliptic on Monday August 24, 2015 @04:51AM (#10108599)

Why would HTTP2 eradicate the minifier? It seems completely orthogonal to minification.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by nathankleyn on Monday August 24, 2015 @05:00AM (#10108623)

Edited, that's a mistake - I meant to write "HTTP2 + Web Assembly" (which will take the place of file concatenation and minification).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Backdooring JavaScript using minifier bugs by gliptic on Monday August 31, 2015 @12:54PM (#10147717)

WebAssembly will only be applicable to asm.js-style code, not JavaScript in general.

[ Parent | on HN ]