The library hadn't had any updates in 2 years before this. Clearly it wasn't maintained. If you're a user and bothered by this super edge case "vulnerability", fork it and take on the responsibility yourself.
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
142 points (98.0% liked)
Programming
17426 readers
82 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
100%. I think the developer taking the project read only was not a temper tantrum, it was just them signifying they don't have time to maintain it. So now if you want anything to happen you must fork it.
I find this outcome delightful for all the compliance mandated organizations that are leaching with no intention to contribute back.
It could be really helpful for developers at pure leech organizations to make a case for being ready to contribute in an agile manner.
Now they're all stuck waiting on either a good Samaritan, or their lawyers to get out of the way of progress.
I have little doubt that the fix has been committed to private forks dozens of times already, of course.
This whole debacle is a festival of stupidity:
- It's a personal project that taxes the sole maintainer disproportionately.
- Millions of idiots use it blindly and end up building elaborate software on it. https://xkcd.com/2347/
- I'll bet you 99.99% of those idiots use it only for
ip.isPrivate(), which you can write yourself in 5 minutes. - The CVE is a non-issue (who the fuck would call a function that takes string notation with hex numbers?)
- Appealing and reverting or downgrading CVEs is super complicated.
At this point the maintainer is fucked no matter what they do, so archiving the project and telling everybody to fuck off right back was really the only sane thing to do.
Clearly it wasn't maintained.
Lol. It's an IP library. IP classifications haven't changed. What could he possibly update?
There's a whole bunch of pull requests and issues sitting there for a start.
Personally I'd also update the example in the readme and set an engine value in the package.json file.
Then fork it and do that.
These projects are structured as hobbyist projects and get whatever time the maintainer can spare. I have projects like that, they're useful, but I'm not gonna prioritize them over... anything else, come to think of it.
The fact so many people treat a hobbyist project with one maintainer as critical infrastructure is insane, but that's on them. Everybody likes free software, nobody likes to help or pay the maintainer.
"unchanged" isn't "unmaintained". Wow, that's a really short-sighted take.
I do feel like we may have hit a time where the groups classifying CVEs are a bit desperate for numbers. It's really hard to tell the legitimate ones from the ones where it's like "If you had tiny gremlins with soldering irons living inside your PC, its possible they might be able to determine what year your computer thinks it is. The gremlins are assumed to have full domain admin access".