And with a content injection vulnerability as well:
http://www.apple.com/au/support/ipod/service/label/diy.html?dispatchnumber=<img src=https://what.thedailywtf.com//uploads/default/8214/16c00f5bd6b57125.png>
http://i.imgur.com/qJaRfCe.png
Chrome's XSS Auditor protects against script injection, but I'm sure someone could manage a bypass (especially one targeted at older browsers) or a CSRF.
@Mason_Wheeler said in United Airlines: the airline we love to hate, but we can't agree on why:
@HardwareGeek said in United Airlines: the airline we love to hate, but we can't agree on why:
Some very serious people spent years and years in the 90s pushing for airlines to reinforce cockpit doors against the very plausible event of a hijacking attempt. The airlines resisted, not wanting the expense.Then 9/11 happened. Now they're all reinforced.
And then a pilot locked the cockpit door while the copilot was in the lavatory and flew the plane into the side of a mountain. Before 9/11 hijackings were regarded as hostage situations at worst; they were eminently survivable for passengers and crew.
@MrL said in Amazon out to kill every WISP in existence:
Thankfully QR codes never cought on around here.
As for menus, I've never seen non-physical one.
It doesn't matter if QR codes have been cought on; you don't have to touch them to scan them with your phone's camera. What people are worried about is whether a physical menu has been cought on.
@dkf said in Undefined OOP Techniques:
Why can't the C++ committee stop with this pretence and define an evaluation order (and let the compiler handle the non-breaking reorderings)?
Performance in the presence of aliasing.
auto f(int (&array)[3], int& i, int& j) { array[i++] = j; }
If you define an evaluation order then the compiler has to serialize the reads and writes, which could result in an underfilled pipeline. If it can assume that i and j don't alias each other nor array, it can issue the reads and writes overlapped.
@Mason_Wheeler said in United Airlines: the airline we love to hate, but we can't agree on why:
@HardwareGeek said in United Airlines: the airline we love to hate, but we can't agree on why:
Some very serious people spent years and years in the 90s pushing for airlines to reinforce cockpit doors against the very plausible event of a hijacking attempt. The airlines resisted, not wanting the expense.Then 9/11 happened. Now they're all reinforced.
And then a pilot locked the cockpit door while the copilot was in the lavatory and flew the plane into the side of a mountain. Before 9/11 hijackings were regarded as hostage situations at worst; they were eminently survivable for passengers and crew.
@MrL said in Amazon out to kill every WISP in existence:
Thankfully QR codes never cought on around here.
As for menus, I've never seen non-physical one.
It doesn't matter if QR codes have been cought on; you don't have to touch them to scan them with your phone's camera. What people are worried about is whether a physical menu has been cought on.
@dkf said in Undefined OOP Techniques:
Why can't the C++ committee stop with this pretence and define an evaluation order (and let the compiler handle the non-breaking reorderings)?
Performance in the presence of aliasing.
auto f(int (&array)[3], int& i, int& j) { array[i++] = j; }
If you define an evaluation order then the compiler has to serialize the reads and writes, which could result in an underfilled pipeline. If it can assume that i and j don't alias each other nor array, it can issue the reads and writes overlapped.
And with a content injection vulnerability as well:
http://www.apple.com/au/support/ipod/service/label/diy.html?dispatchnumber=<img src=https://what.thedailywtf.com//uploads/default/8214/16c00f5bd6b57125.png>
http://i.imgur.com/qJaRfCe.png
Chrome's XSS Auditor protects against script injection, but I'm sure someone could manage a bypass (especially one targeted at older browsers) or a CSRF.