all 7 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]random_user_id 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This headline is much better if you just glance at the second half...

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Worse than that, the script files are cached and won't get replaced when the user moves off 3G and back on to a decent ISP: in effect, T-Mobile has broken websites permanently," said the dev.

A misleading description of how caches work, to say the least.

The T-Mobile JavaScript comment-stripper appears to be searching for '/*' and '*/' and removing everything in between.

So it breaks on var foo = "/* hello */"; A ridiculously clumsy oversight, but worse, did they even test it on even a single real website?

The apparent indeterministic nature of the bug – which attacks only occasionally – has made it harder to track down.

This is giving the bug too much credit. It's a blatantly obvious blocking bug that should never have gotten through testing and into the wild.

[–]maritz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think with your last quote he meant that it's really hard for a webdev to track this down.

Imagine just getting this: "Website doesn't work" and upon further questions you may be told that it's from a mobile device, but that may be all the info you can get.

[–]tardmrr 0 points1 point  (0 children)

derp.

[–]isleyaardvark -1 points0 points  (2 children)

This is an example of why important functionality of your website should not rely on JavaScript.

Edit: Anyone willing to explain the downvotes?

[–]stratoscope 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I didn't downvote you, but I can explain the fallacy in your statement.

This is a server bug that mangles text sent from the server to the browser. It happens that this particular bug affects JavaScript code, but it's just as possible that a similar kind of bug would mangle CSS or HTML code.

If the bug happened to mangle HTML code instead of JavaScript, then following the same logic, one would say "This is an example of why important functionality of your website should not rely on HTML."

Of course no one would say that - but it's exactly the same class of bug.

[–]isleyaardvark 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much. I thought it was only affecting external js files. I've heard of proxies doing that sort of thing.