Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by dylz on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @02:19PM
(#16969770)
I see crap like:
constantly in real life in 2018
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by jancsika on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @02:42PM
(#16970055)
Isn't this likely due to a second-order effect?
For example, there is (was?) a bug in nw.js with using @font-face to specify a font url that is in the same (local) location as the manifest. As a hack I tried specifying the font as a base64-encoded data url. It worked!
I had no use for base64, other than that there exists an interface for specifying data and it takes a base64-encoded string.
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by loup-vaillant on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @02:23PM
(#16969817)
Yes, but why? There's a reason for everything, so I guess this serves some purpose, somehow? I guess the ultimate reason is stupidity or bad planning or cut corners, but I'm still curious.
Bonus point if there's a situation where avoiding something like base64 is actually difficult, even in 2018.
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by jessaustin on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @02:36PM
(#16969983)
If one wanted to embed a random token in an email, what would one use instead of base64?
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by loup-vaillant on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @04:18PM
(#16971094)
Attachments?
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by jessaustin on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @04:45PM
(#16971404)
ISTM that amounts to the same thing? MIME is Base64.
Re:The Catch 22 of Base64: Attacker Dilemma from a Defender ...
by loup-vaillant on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @06:18PM
(#16972257)
<facepalm>