Reply to post: Re: Bah!

New Firefox, Chrome SRI script whip to foil man-in-the-middle diddle

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: Bah!

"No it isn't useful. Client-side JavaScript allows people to add shiny to webpages, that's all, and to add shiny it has to leave us open to stupid attack vectors that the JavaScripters are incapable of defending against."

OK, how do you do something like a live board or another dynamic web page WITHOUT client-side code OR constant and annoying (as in customers will probably abandon you) refreshing? Without stuff like Ajax, you'll have to do large and time-consuming PostBacks rather than the more-efficient CallBacks: again a major headache for web apps. Not to mention doing everything server-side will put additional strain on the servers in a day increasingly where every Hertz counts. The only alternatives to JavaScript are Java, Flash, and Silverlight. Guess what? They're more despised than JavaScript! What you're saying is that we have to abandon the web app altogether. News flash: The web app now is like alcohol during Prohibition; people will abandon you before they abandon the web app.

"And I don't have to explicitly show you or anyone else jack spit. All I have to do is sit back and sigh every time another round of pwnership is laid at the feet of this boil on the backside of the web."

Yes you do, or your argument wouldn't survive a court (and this IS a court in a sense—a court of public opinion). Specifics or you're making a hollow case, in which case you will likely be ignored. I at least specifically note why JavaScript is still needed (because server-side can't do dynamic content).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon