rmorlok

I've been working on AuthProxy, an open source embedded integration-platform-as-a-service. It has an embedded connector marketplace that lets you connect to 3rd party systems, then provides a proxy that handles the credentials automatically. Been working on it for a couple of years and in the last month or so have been trying it out to build an MCP gateway for some internal tooling.

https://github.com/rmorlok/authproxy

I've been working on my open source integration-platform-as-a-service (iPaaS) auth proxy. It provides an embeddable integration marketplace where users can connect 3rd party apps, and it provides a proxy endpoint to the host application to send authenticated outbound requests. That way token refresh, audit, etc stay with this system and frees the host application/agent/whatever free to just focus on the business logic.

https://github.com/rmorlok/authproxy

I really like the approach you've taken of providing an egress proxy. That let's you do a lot of things that layer around providing gaurdrails and auditing. I've been taking a similar approach on an open source embedded iPaaS project I've been working on where it primarily offers an authenticating egress proxy to whatever business logic needs it (agent, sync engine, etc).

https://github.com/rmorlok/authproxy

More active thread on the issue:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34255319

I received this email as well. Here is the blog post: https://circleci.com/blog/january-4-2023-security-alert/

pdf2htmlEX (https://github.com/coolwanglu/pdf2htmlEX) would be another route if you aren't concerned about preserving the semantics of the markup. Obviously you would to go LaTeX -> PDF -> HTML5. It maintains the paginated style and looks good for scientific papers (example: http://coolwanglu.github.io/pdf2htmlEX/demo/demo.html)

MailLift (https://maillift.com/) takes the alternative approach of crowdsourcing the writing.

The Freakonomics Podcast has an episode on faecal transplants:

http://freakonomics.com/2011/03/04/freakonomics-radio-the-po...

I work on a team that has members distributed across two locations. We use the policy described above, but there is a flip side to this problem. Most of our developers are one location with a 1/6 minority in another. The larger group of developers loses the advantages of face-to-face communication for meetings in favor of equal footing for everyone. Is that a net improvement on quality of communication? I don't know, but I'd rather meet with my colleagues in adjacent cubes face-to-face rather than over the phone the way we do now.

The best part of that page was the ad for the Google Nexus One at the bottom that Google chose to show me. But I don't care, because Google does a pretty good job.