Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Seriously, all that's being said is:

    - Here's a library that claims to validate certificates.
    - Here's a TLS httpd with a forged commonName.
    - for ciphersuite in $supported; do
Completing this test is an exercise for the reader, yet we're waxing philosophical about the perils of Ruby on Rails in this thread for some reason. If I'm being told by a security expert that such a framework would not be helpful, that's concerning and makes me wonder how many bugs such a framework would uncover (given that this one remained untouched for a decade).


This is very close to some of our integration test setups. It's literally a pair of folders "good inputs" and "bad inputs". To run our integration tests, we just throw each input file in those folders at the application and check if it works or if it crashes.

Some of the stuff has assertion files, too, so you can check the way it fails or check some conditions the success, but that's not common.

Overall, this took like a day or two to setup and it catches a lot of errors already, especially because people can just drop errors into the bad input folder and be done with it until someone has time to handle it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: