msquic VS base-drafts

I referred to sockets as an API design, not to express an opinion on whether you should place your protocol implementations inside or outside the kernel. (Although that’s undeniably an interesting question that by all rights should have been settled by now, but isn’t.)

Even then, I didn’t mean you should reproduce the Berkeley socket API verbatim (ZeroMQ-style); multiple streams per connection does not sound like a particularly good fit to it (although apparently people have managed to fit SCTP into it[1]?). I only meant that with the current mainstream libraries[2,3,4], establishing a QUIC connection and transmitting bytestreams or datagrams over it seems quite a bit more involved than performing the equivalent TCP actions using sockets.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6458

[2] https://quiche.googlesource.com/quiche

[3] https://github.com/microsoft/msquic

[4] https://github.com/litespeedtech/lsquic

The documentation of MS QUIC says it is cross-platform, it should work on Linux, it has a CMake preset for Linux and you can download the prebuilt binary releases for Linux.

Hello HN, my name is Varun, and I am the co-founder of StepSecurity. Here is the backstory about Harden-Runner. We thoroughly researched past software supply chain security incidents. The devastating breaches of SolarWinds, Codecov, and others, have one thing in common – they attacked the CI/ CD pipeline or the build server.

These incidents made it clear that a purpose-built security agent was needed for CI/ CD. While there are numerous agents available for desktops and servers, such as from CrowdStrike and Lacework, none have been tailored specifically to address the unique risks present in CI/CD pipelines.

With the understanding that a specialized solution was needed to secure CI/CD environments, we developed Harden-Runner, an open-source solution tailored specifically for GitHub Actions hosted runners. It can be seamlessly integrated into your workflow by simply adding a step. The agent installation process is also lightning-fast, taking no more than 5 seconds to complete.

Harden-Runner's security agent is designed to closely monitor all aspects of the workflow run, including DNS, network, file, and process events. This allows for real-time identification of any potential security breaches. To prevent incidents like the Codecov breach, where exfiltration of credentials occurred, Harden-Runner allows you to set policies that restrict outbound traffic at both the DNS and network layers. Additionally, we are actively working on implementing further restrictions at the application layer, such as using HTTP verbs and paths, to provide an even more comprehensive security solution.

An excellent example of how Harden-Runner effectively blocks outbound traffic can be found in the following link: https://app.stepsecurity.io/github/microsoft/msquic/actions/.... As you can see, all traffic to unauthorized endpoints is highlighted in red, indicating that it has been blocked; this is because these endpoints are not included in the allowed list defined in the GitHub Actions workflow file, which can be viewed here: https://github.com/microsoft/msquic/blob/aaecb0fac5a3902dd24....

One of the key features of Harden-Runner's monitoring capabilities is its ability to detect any tampering or alteration of files during the build process, similar to the SolarWinds incident. To further enhance security and protect against potential malicious tools or attempts to disable the agent, Harden-Runner includes a disable-sudo mode. This mode effectively disables the use of 'sudo' on the hosted runner, providing an additional layer of protection

Harden-Runner has already been adopted by over 600 open-source repositories: https://github.com/step-security/harden-runner/network/depen.... To fully understand the capabilities of Harden-Runner and how it can protect against past supply chain attacks, please try out our attack simulator GitHub repository at https://github.com/step-security/attack-simulator. I would love to hear your feedback.

https://github.com/microsoft/msquic (QUIC / HTTP3)

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/253

TL;DR just like HTTP/2, we wanted to avoid friction in deploying these protocols. Having to rewrite URLs because of new schemes is pretty unpalatable, it has major impact. Instead, HTTP/3 can rely on other IETF-defined mechanisms like Alt-Svc (RFC 7838) and the more recent SVCB / HTTPS RR [1] DNS-based methods. The latter has been deployed on Cloudflare a while [2] and supported in Firefox. Other user agents have also expressed interest or intent to support it.

The net outcome is that developers can by and large focus on HTTP semantics, and let something a little further down the stack worry more about versions. Sometime devs will need to peek into that area, but not the majority.

[1] - https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-...

After lots of hard work, we're excited to open-source [s2n-quic](https://github.com/aws/s2n-quic), a Rust implementation of the [IETF QUIC protocol](https://quicwg.org/). Feel free to ask any questions here in the comments or by [opening an issue](https://github.com/aws/s2n-quic/issues/new/choose). Thanks!

Maybe check out laminar and quinn, which implement custom protocols on top of UDP (quinn implements QUIC), to get an idea on how to do things.

IETF work is conducted mostly on email lists, hence the "many thousands of emails".

For some newer work like QUIC, GitHub is used to maintain a more to-the-minute shared view of the documents, and then again as mentioned in the text you quoted, GitHub Issues and PRs are used to manage the document, particularly by the most active participants.

https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts - of course raising issues or PRs for them now won't do anything useful for you, because these RFCs were published. But you can see there were thousands of commits, one of the last being Martin Thompson's minor typographical tweaks summarised as "DOES IT NEVER END?!?".