I don't think I've ever truly "bricked" a iPhone, or got one to the point it CAN'T be put DFU mode and restored. Cydia tweaks made it sound like one wrong move could render your device permanently unusable, at most it was a inconvenience.

You can very easily brick an iPhone by logging in to an iCloud account and then forgetting the password (which of course TFA will not help with)

if you go into an apple store, they can fix that for you. might help if you look... i dunno, middle aged?

Does it still work if you're not the original retail customer?

i was not the original retail customer, it was a phone used by a small business that I had owned, the employees were not good about keeping track of stuff like that, they'd use their own personal deets to sign up for business things all the time.

my point was that there was not "official" procedure to verify, I told him the story, he believed me, and went in the back and reset the password or something. They have the capability if they want to. He was a manager I think, and I didn't get to him through the reservations queue, I just walked up to the counter to find out if this was the place I should go, and after I asked my question he took an interest and solved the problem for me.

Did you have receipts or any other way to prove that you/the business you owned purchased the phone?

I assumed it's to attach to the "as" naming prefix, asus, asrock, asmedia, etc.

What does that prefix mean?

Nothing. It's Pegasus with the first two letters removed so they'd be at the top of the phone book when we used phone books way back in 1989.

Last year, a Microsoft support representative even used it on a customer's computer.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38295819

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/microsoft-sup...

TEngine might be the most well-known fork

That ones new to me, I was aware of Angie and Freenginx which are both led by former nginx developers who left F5 after the acquisition. TEngine looks to be a much older fork but I can't find much recent discussion about it, though that may be because it's an Alibaba/Taobao project with a primarily Chinese userbase judging by the GitHub issues.

For wayback machine, are those compressed, deduplicated numbers? A semi-popular domain can have millions of results on their CDX api, but with https/https duplicated and about 90% of results are error pages or pages with deliberate garbage / LFI attempts in them.

Deduplication is not trivial. Each scrape is stored in a WARC archive, so you would have to unpack several large files, dedupe, and then pack them back up again. I believe they are at least compressed within each snapshot though.

Yes, that seems to be a silly way to go about it if your goal is to store the whole web and not just a single scrape. Of course anything that deduplicates data is more vulnerable to data corruption (or at least corruption can have wider consequences) so it's not a trivial problem but you'd think deduplicating identical resources would be something added the first time they came close to their storage limits.

that's pretty much the universal Japanese learning experience (except for people who know Chinese)

>Modern operating systems don’t run binaries tampered with a hex editor.

do you mean non-system ones?

MacOS is notorious for this. By default, it would only run binaries signed with an Apple-issued certificate. You can bypass this multiple different ways, of course, but that requires knowing that it can be bypassed in the first place.

Then there are mobile OSes where you don't get to see the binaries at all. Yes you can repack an apk but again, that's a more involved process requiring specific tools and knowledge (and very awkward to do on the device itself), and iOS is completely locked down.

> MacOS is notorious for this. By default, it would only run binaries signed with an Apple-issued certificate. You can bypass this multiple different ways, of course, but that requires knowing that it can be bypassed in the first place.

What do you mean? When I compile something with a myriad of different language stacks or compiler toolchains, I'm not aware of an Apple-issued certificate ever being involved and those binaries run just fine.

Probably because the environment you use to compile it, like the terminal or Xcode, is added to "developer tools" under security settings. Xcode in particular does that for itself automatically.

So I don't even need to know how to bypass it because it happens automatically behind the scenes. Nice.

But if you edit a binary with a hex editor, invalidating its signature, you would need to know how to bypass it.

Unlike your average user, if you have the knowledge to apply a hex editor, then you probably can Google how to work around the signature error.

It won’t run on another user’s computer unless it’s been Notarized.

Some OSs want their binaries to be signed and probably have checksums etc. It would be hard to keep those valid when mucking around with a hex editor.

This is fine if the user was empowered to re-sign it after the mucking. The problem is that the user is rarely in charge of their own computer anymore.

Outside of mobile operating systems, eg on Linux, Windows and MacOS (and all the BSDs etc) it's fairly trivial to run binaries you built yourself.

But: re-signing is an extra step that someone who's just starting out and mucking around with a hexeditor might not know how to do nor even be aware of.

Creating a reddit account took 25 seconds and they even generated a username for me. No email verification necessary, sorry to a@example.com if you're getting emails about reddit user "Agile_Rectangle729"

Hahahaha! Thank you for the laugh

Rotating could have been manual and the person in charge wanted to save time. Stress could be a factor too.

Why not just use tar or any other archive tool on the repository .git folder? Unless your repository is a un-gc'd mess with millions of unpacked objects...

I think that is a fair alternative, but restoring the backup means that the repository is in a bit of a weird state. Whereas a bundle can be cloned from nicely. Your way does have the property that it includes hooks and config, though (which could be desired or not).

There are very few/no operations that will put a git repository in a "weird" state.

Actually, any snapshot of a Git repository is consistent (due to its CAS nature), minus the index which doesn't really need backup anyway.

This is also non-deterministic between versions of tar, but I guess for this usecase that would be fine. It’s just not good for reproducible build systems when trying to recreate tarballs after years.

Wouldn't all these useless build artifacts be outside the .git folders?