|
As long as you're aware that anyone can decompile your code to get those credentials
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter...wherever and however you store them the decompile will tell someone how to get them. Even if you encrypt them the method and keys will be in your code\config.
|
|
|
|
|
No, the user names are in the config; the app prompts for the passwords.
modified 6-Jun-17 16:18pm.
|
|
|
|
|
That actually sounds about as clean as it can get, given what you have to work with and the restrictions in place.
The app I work on at work (well, I only work on a very small part of it) needs to do impersonation in a few key places, and the library "we" (not "I") put together relies on exactly that. I've never studied the implementation all that closely to understand it, but I do recall seeing some rather exhaustive and nasty-looking error-handling and fallback code, with P/Invoke added in there to muddy the waters. That code's evolved over a period of 10+ years, so I can only imagine the feeling when you got it working...
|
|
|
|
|
We really should not do it this way. But, Sometimes things have to be done in order to please the overlords.
True discussion today. Same everywhere.
To err is human to really mess up you need a computer
|
|
|
|
|
Having been an "overlord" I have learned that, like personal relationships, stuff like this is always due to poor communication -- usually on both sides of the fence.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I had the dubious pleasure of working for some 'overlords' who had lost their grasp on reality. Their expectations were absolutely unrealistic, given the poor shape of their projects and they never realized that it was their precious way of micromanaging things that led to this poor quality.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
Totally agree. There are bad managers out there just like there are bad devs out there. Micromanagement is usually the result of feeling out of control of the situation so they have to over-compensate. And that tends to happen when people have no idea what they're doing. Me still thinks the best managers used to be devs, that way they have a clue what's going on. But, I digress.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
... I'm with Randall[^] on this one ...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
N_tro_P wrote: what does the government and their much bigger coin purse have access to?
This
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about this[^]?
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
The drones you have to worry about are those that aren't public knowledge. Things like mosquito drones that can infiltrate small domains, like homes, without being seen.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
N_tro_P wrote: Also, he flew it so high you could not even see it anymore. Sent it out a few miles too. The drone has a battery safety feature to "Fly home" if the battery power is getting to low. It then does a landing where you are (with your smart phone).
I think the drone has that follow feature too, so it could follow you on the highway or going down a mountain on skis. Booooring. I want to fly myself, not watch a microcontroller do it.
Besides that, this is more than dangerous. If only a single motor fails, this thing will come down. The electronics will not help a bit and most owners of these toys would have the skill to bring it down safely with limited control. They will certainly not be able to do it when their toy is out of sight. One day someone will be hurt or even killed in an accident and then we are all going to have lots of fun because of such an idiot.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: One day someone will be hurt or even killed in an accident and then we are all going to have lots of fun because of such an idiot.
I suspect that serious legislation will be forthcoming limiting everybody's ability to fly RC as a result of these things.
The UEFA (Wendyball) Champions League Final on Saturday had to be played in a stadium with the roof closed to prevent drone attacks ... so security folks are already cautious. Government workers (well known for their sense of fun everywhere in the world) will probably overreact soon.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
This has already been happening for incidents where nothing really happened and nobody really could say, what exactly they saw. We do not need new laws, they just need to enforce the ones that we already have and apply them to those who don't quite get it.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
And if your government is anything like ours, you'll get new laws anyway ...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, and those of us who think safety is 'ranting' and a obvious sign of not knowing anything about the matter will convince them that this is the way to go.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
N_tro_P wrote: Then you misunderstand how it works. Then I was just lucky when I went out flying yesterday?
N_tro_P wrote: Also, if I spend more than $100 on a toy, I am very glad to hear it protects itself from my stupidity. Not to such a degree. I see enough of them every week who use their electronics as an excuse not to learn how to fly.
N_tro_P wrote: That is a total fallacy. No, it's not. For one thing, never trust a software that you have not misprogrammed yourself. Usually the software is not smart enough to react correctly to something unusual. It could, for example, pick up a vibration over the gyro, try to compensate and make the copter almost uncontrollable.
N_tro_P wrote: Why do you assume a programmed system can not fly safely if a motor fails but a hobbyist can??? Because I have already manually landed a helicopter with a failed swashplate servo. The electronics would simply have tried to use the servo to compensate and simply not have gotten it that the servo was frozen. It's a matter of split seconds and either you can save the model or you can't.
N_tro_P wrote: It seems if there was any mechanical failure, this would become totally chaotic but a system could easily detect a motor failure and safely land it. No. I don't know a single system that would detect anything at all. besides that, depending on the number of motors and their alignment, not all multicopters can recover from a motor failure. In that case you can only try to minimize the damage. To people, to other's property and perhaps even to the model.
N_tro_P wrote: Actually, that is sort of the point of the safety controls. Honestly, it seems like you really don't know much about drones and are just ranting. Yes, sure. That's it. So you think it's very smart to have a thing of considerable weight and engine power flying around autonomously, blind and without the owner's control? And it's ok that the owners don't care about controlling anything and use these safety features for the big show?
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
CDP1802 wrote: N_tro_P wrote: Actually, that is sort of the point of the safety controls. Honestly, it seems like you really don't know much about drones and are just ranting. Yes, sure. That's it. So you think it's very smart to have a thing of considerable weight and engine power flying around autonomously, blind and without the owner's control? And it's ok that the owners don't care about controlling anything and use these safety features for the big show?
Sounds like something a government entity would do.
When you are dead, you won't even know that you are dead. It's a pain only felt by others.
Same thing when you are stupid.
modified 19-Nov-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Luckily not. Our buerocrats came with the idea that you have to see an instructor, take lessons and then get a license. Up to now they did not get anything like this through yet.
The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here
This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.
"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."
If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.
|
|
|
|
|
|