We mostly use memory-safe high level languages at LShift (although we’ve done the odd embedded systems dev job), but sometimes a bit of systems programming knowhow still comes handy. I had the misfortune of a pure, i.e. no-JNI java program segfaulting on me with Oracle Java 7 in a non-reproducible fashion. I wanted to find out what exactly the program was up to at the point of the crash. Helpfully, on fatal errors java will generate a slightly obscurely named file
is the pid your deceased java process run under (the
comes from HotSpot, in case you wonder). This file contains amongst other things a VM stacktrace which will tell you were in C-land things went wrong.
But let’s jump straight to the chase and open the core dump file like in gdb like so:
You love GitHub. Of course you do. You love peer review. You especially love sending a pull request back asking for nits to be picked. So when your submitter claims to have addressed your concerns, how do you check? You could walk the commits. You could diff the entire pull request against master. If only you could diff the HEAD of the pull request against the original state of the pull request, letting you check just the new set of commits…
With github-differ you can!
Simply add this tiny extension to your Chrome, and it will decorate each commit in GitHub’s Commits tab. Pick any two commits, and the extension will redirect you to a page showing the comparison of those two commits! Job done!
“Group Policy is a feature of the Microsoft Windows NT family of operating systems that control the working environment of user accounts and computer accounts. Group Policy provides the centralized management and configuration of operating systems, applications, and users’ settings in an Active Directory environment…Local Group Policy (LGP) is a more basic version of the Group Policy used by Active Directory.” – Wikipedia
There are various settings in Windows that come under the remit of the group policy. Even for computers that do not belong to an Active Directory domain there are settings that can only be changed via the local group policy.
The graphical editor, gpedit.msc, is pretty easy to use. But what to do when we need to script policy changes?
At LShift, we tend to be big fans of functional programming, and in particular I’ve found ideas from languages like Clojure and Haskell do influence how I use more mainstream languages such as Ruby.
One technology that’s been useful to us on a current project is QuickCheck-alike for Ruby, Rantly. Briefly, rather than testing a module in your code by taking a set of (hopefully representative) examples of use and demonstrating that they produce the correct (usually pre-calculated) output, you can have the library generate input data and compare the results to a model.
ReadingÂ Japanese govt: Use operator-run app stores, not Google Play reminded me of an app that I use a lot, but who’s permissions are a cause for concern: Ocado on the Go.
The Ocado app wants to use your phone’s video camera, so it can scan bar codes. This is a legitimate requirement: there’s no way to do this using an intent. The trouble is, this is true for any real time use of the video camera. E.g. Samsung are planning to implement scrolling by tracking your eye movement. The video camera is the last thing you want to give unmoderated access to. This is really something for Google to fix.
The Ocado app wants to save your delivery slot in your calendar. Again, this is useful but I can’t see why this isn’t done with an intent, and hence requires no permissions. Instead, the app asks for for permission to ‘add or modify calendar events and send email to guests without owners’ knowledge, read calendar events plus confidential information’. That sounds like something I’d only want Google to be able to do, right? This is one for Ocado to fix: I know the user experience will be compromised a bit, and there’s someone in marketing jumping up and down, but this really is a race to the bottom: if Ocado feel they can justify having this permission, and everyone copies them, Android users won’t be able to reject apps based on their permissions, and hence won’t be able to rely on having a secure calendar.
Actually, Ocado need to fix their app, but where is the incentive? Only Google have an interest in the security of the platform as a whole. Perhaps if Google gave apps a security score calculated from the requested permissions, and made it prominent on the Play store? I’d be tempted to charge for listings on the store, based on the security score. Otherwise, we are back to using only closed stores with vetted apps.
It’s not even possible to fix this using something like Cyanogenmod. The app just uses an API which a user can’t effectively moderate.
Not content with that, Ocado on the Go asks for the following additional permissions for no apparent reason:
I don’t think it will be long before APTs areÂ targetingÂ Android developers, with the intent of adding malware to widely used applications. APTs can target developers watering holes, and then seek out the Android SDK, and applications on developers hosts. Then it’s not a question of trusting Ocado’s intent, but the competence of their network security manager.
You are currently browsing the LShift Ltd. blog archives for March, 2013.