> The thing is, your Keycloak instance is not going to matter to any hacker, particularly if it's inside a VPN and not reachable from the Internet.
This doesn't make it particularly usable as SSO...
>Good network design costs a lot of money to set up, particularly to limit the scope of an attack (e.g. because the VPN software had a vulnerability), but it's orders of magnitude better in the long run than to outsource core IT to some incompetent fools with subcontractors.
This is exactly my point. Most businesses not not have the resources to maintain this level of infrastructure.
Additionally, I'm personally of the opinion that walled gardens with VPN entry points are a particularly good choice for modern businesses these days. Even the White House OMB is pushing the beyondcorp model in their recent recommendations for ZT.
I'm not sure Keycloak is a viable alternative for most businesses. Security software as a whole tends to be _extremely_ difficult to run securely and at scale.
Honestly, most of these companies would be better off using Google, Azure or AWS' SSO-as-a-Service product (if that's what you're hoping to get out of Keycloak).
That's not to say that I don't appreciate that there's an open-source alternative out there, however.
I think this may have changed, very recently. Now when I paste any of the example strings in the post, I get an alert that I've pasted markdown, with options to apply formatting, or not ask again[1]. After that, it recommends using a new shortcut, (Cmd/Ctrl)+Shift+F[2].
> There's nothing Node could or should have done about the lack of string padding. Node's "standard library" is first and foremost concerned with enabling network and filesystem IO. JS on the other hand even lacks a built-in way to handle dates properly (the Date class is largely an afterthought based on Java).
That's absolutely incorrect. Now, I might be using a slightly contrived example here, but take RPython and compare it with Python. Both use mostly the same syntax (i.e. ECMAScript vs Node.js), but one is extensively much more feature-filled than the other because it targets general-purpose programming(Python) vs a very specific purpose language, used as a lower level "Framework" if you will (RPython). RPython has no need to implement something like `left-pad` (although because it's a subset of Python, it's sort of already implemented)
With RPython, it's intended you build things on top of it (which is how I view ECMAScript), whereas with Python (more like Node.js) you'd expect that to...exist.
The fact of the matter is, the language teams in these examples had completely different goals and I personally believe that Node.js should have gone more the Python route and had an extremely strong standard library that would handle mundane tasks like `left-pad` does. It disappoints me that the Node.js team (outside of the ECMA technical committee, which designs the language itself) does not thing it should be responsible for this kind of simple tooling and instead rather passes it off to developers.
> Left-pad had a fairly trivial implementation but that implementation is easy to get wrong, so it's something you want to make sure you have covered by tests
...What? That makes no sense. `left-pad` is trivial to implement and test. There may be edge cases but for most people, writing tests to cover the edge cases they care about rather than pulling in a dependency just to handle something as simple as padding a string.
Not to mention, Node's near-complete lack of a standard library is at fault here, not developers, nor the ECMA technical committee.
What seems to be missing in the comments here is the `--user` option to pip. Lets you install modules on a per-user basis, doesn't mess with system python. All you need to do is add the bin folder this creates to your path.
2. The fact that they're using "something" bleed as the name (creativity, please)
3. That whoever created this page recommends the user alter the miner to point to some other, user-controlled HTTP server, effectively MITMing anyone who sees this page.
Four years after Steve Jobs’s death, a new movie is reopening a debate over the Apple Inc. co-founder’s legacy.
Mr. Jobs’s allies, led by his widow, Laurene Powell Jobs, say the film “Steve Jobs,” and other recent depictions, play down his accomplishments and paint Mr. Jobs as cruel and inhumane. Ms. Jobs repeatedly tried to kill the film, according to people familiar with the conversations. She lobbied, among others, Sony Pictures Entertainment, which developed the script but passed on the movie for financial reasons, and Comcast Corp.’s Universal Pictures, which is releasing the $33.5 million production on Friday.
“A whole generation is going to think of him in a different way if they see a movie that depicts him in a negative way,” said Bill Campbell, a longtime Apple board member and friend of Mr. Jobs. Mr. Campbell hasn't seen the film.
The movie’s creators, who include “Slumdog Millionaire” director Danny Boyle and “The Social Network” screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, say it is within the bounds of artistic license.
The film is based on a best-selling biography of Mr. Jobs by Walter Isaacson. Mr. Jobs cooperated with Mr. Isaacson while he was writing the book, but some friends and former colleagues, including Apple Chief Executive Tim Cook, have criticized it in recent months.
Asked about the movie by “The Late Show” host Stephen Colbert recently, Mr. Cook said, “I think a lot of people are trying to be opportunistic and I hate this.”
People behind “Steve Jobs” say they offered to include Ms. Jobs in the film’s development, but she declined.
“She refused to discuss anything in Aaron’s script that bothered her despite my repeated entreaties,” producer Scott Rudin said in an emailed response to questions from The Wall Street Journal. He said Ms. Jobs “continued to say how much she disliked the book, and that any movie based on the book could not possibly be accurate.”
Ms. Jobs declined to comment for this article.
The Hollywood-Silicon Valley sparring echoes that over “The Social Network,” the 2010 film about Mark Zuckerberg and the rise of Facebook Inc. Facebook sought and won script changes. Mr. Zuckerberg later said the movie “made up a bunch of stuff that I found kind of hurtful.”
“Steve Jobs” arrives amid a broader reassessment of Mr. Jobs. His 2011 death provoked public mourning unusual for a business executive, and Apple has since become the world’s most valuable company by market capitalization. More recent depictions of Mr. Jobs look beyond his achievements at Apple and probe his personal life, including a complicated relationship with his eldest daughter.
In March, Apple Senior Vice President Eddy Cue walked out of a screening of “Steve Jobs: Man in the Machine,” a documentary directed by Alex Gibney. Mr. Cue later tweeted that the film was an “inaccurate and mean-spirited view of my friend.” Mr. Cue also talked to several Hollywood executives about the coming Universal movie, echoing Ms. Jobs’s concerns.
Mr. Gibney said in a statement that his film “certainly wasn’t mean-spirited, just truthful.”
“Steve Jobs,” which stars Michael Fassbender in the title role, is divided into acts focused on the launches of three Jobs products: the Macintosh computer in 1984, a NeXT computer in 1988 and the iMac in 1998. It portrays Mr. Jobs as brilliant but abrasive and focuses on sometimes-contentious relationships with key figures in his life, including co-founder Steve Wozniak, marketing executive Joanna Hoffman, his successor as CEO, John Sculley, and his daughter Lisa Brennan-Jobs.
Mr. Sorkin interviewed people portrayed in the movie, and the finished product differs significantly from Mr. Isaacson’s book. Ms. Hoffman and Lisa Brennan-Jobs were minor characters in the book, for example. “When you’re writing about real people…you have a big responsibility,” Mr. Sorkin said in an interview.
The filmmakers say “Steve Jobs” is intended more as an impressionistic portrait of its subject than a photograph. “The truth is not necessarily in the facts, it’s in the feel,” said Mr. Boyle.
In an emailed statement, Universal Pictures Chairman Donna Langley said, “The film was made with the utmost integrity and we are enormously proud of it.”
Mr. Wozniak, who was paid $200,000 to consult on the film, according to a stolen copy of the budget posted online, said he understands that the movie doesn’t precisely portray real events. “It’s about Jobs and his personality,” Mr. Wozniak wrote in an email. “I feel that it did a great job.”
Mr. Jobs’s allies aren’t comforted by such views. “If they want to make a drama, they shouldn’t do it at somebody else’s expense,” said Mr. Campbell. “He’s not there to defend himself.”
Reviews from the Telluride Film Festival, where “Steve Jobs” screened in early September, were largely positive, but the box-office prospects for an adult drama are challenging at a time when television is packed with them. Sony had projected the movie needed to gross $100 million world-wide to break even, according to a document stolen in a corporate hack.
Among the reviews many in Silicon Valley await is that of Ms. Jobs. Universal offered to show her the film, but only if she signed a nondisclosure agreement forbidding her from discussing it publicly until it opened, said her spokesman. She declined.
