in reply to Re^2: Impress your children with Perl
in thread Impress your children with Perl

How is a tinyurl safer than giving the explicit URL? At least with an explicit URL you immediately have a provenance. A tinyurl link could go anywhere.

While the code fiddling issues are concerning, they aren't altered by how the code is accessed so are irrelevant when considering replacing the tinyurl with an explicit URL.

Optimising for fewest key strokes only makes sense transmitting to Pluto or beyond

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^4: Impress your children with Perl
by LanX (Saint) on May 21, 2024 at 22:32 UTC
    > How is a tinyurl safer than giving the explicit URL?

    I don't know? Who said this?

    BTW: I'm the one who first raised the alarm in the CB...

    Cheers Rolf
    (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
    see Wikisyntax for the Monastery

[reply]

      Probably influenced by other comments in the thread I interpreted "And even that isn't save [sic]" in your comment above to mean the direct URL in some fashion wasn't "safe" in the sense that it could point to nefarious code. I presume now your intended meaning is that even the direct URL you gave might not be a reliable ("safe") way of accessing the code.

      Optimising for fewest key strokes only makes sense transmitting to Pluto or beyond
[reply]
        I meant to say that we can't reliably check all (subtle) edits to a post.

        Even if the authors are reliable, their accounts could be hacked, especially after them being inactive for a decade.

        That's why such links should better point to immutable posts, like from anonymous monks.

        Cheers Rolf
        (addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
        see Wikisyntax for the Monastery

[reply]

In Section Cool Uses for Perl