←back to thread

1208 points jamesberthoty | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
codemonkey-zeta ◴[] No.45261026[source]
I'm coming to the unfortunate realizattion that supply chain attacks like this are simply baked into the modern JavaScript ecosystem. Vendoring can mitigate your immediate exposure, but does not solve this problem.

These attacks may just be the final push I needed to take server rendering (without js) more seriously. The HTMX folks convinced me that I can get REALLY far without any JavaScript, and my apps will probably be faster and less janky anyway.

replies(18): >>45261086 #>>45261121 #>>45261140 #>>45261165 #>>45261220 #>>45261265 #>>45261285 #>>45261457 #>>45261571 #>>45261702 #>>45261970 #>>45262601 #>>45262619 #>>45262851 #>>45267210 #>>45268405 #>>45269073 #>>45273081 #
1. rs999gti ◴[] No.45262851[source]
> supply chain attacks

You all really need to stop using this term when it comes to OSS. Supply chain implies a relationship, none of these companies or developers have a relationship with the creators other than including their packages.

Call it something like "free code attacks" or "hobbyist code attacks."

replies(3): >>45262948 #>>45262967 #>>45263155 #
2. __alexs ◴[] No.45262948[source]
I know CrowdStrike have a pretty bad reputation but calling them hobbyists is a bit rude.
replies(1): >>45265117 #
3. shermantanktop ◴[] No.45262967[source]
“code I picked up off the side of the road”

“code I somehow took a dependency on when copying bits of someone’s package.json file”

“code which showed up in my lock file and I still don’t know how it got there”

replies(1): >>45263069 #
4. orbital-decay ◴[] No.45263069[source]
All of which is true for far too many projects
5. pixl97 ◴[] No.45263155[source]
A supply chain can have hobbyists, there's no particular definition that says everyone involved must be a professional registered business.
6. cobbal ◴[] No.45265117[source]
I'm sure no offense was intended to hobbyists, but it was indeed rude