You joke, but I remember seeing a talk by Wunderlist CTO who has pretty much that. Also polyglot company and microservices in random languages. Can't find the talk now, but https://www.infoq.com/news/2014/11/gotober-wunderlist-micros... mentions 60 services at least.
KYC data is the most dangerous data that can leak right now. If your CC leaks, you will know almost immediately and can revoke it and generally will get your money back. Password leaks can be neutered with 2FA. Medical data leak can perhaps be used in a complex extortion, but generally for most people this data is worthless.
KYC data on the other hand allows third party criminals who have bought your KYC on the black market to perform money laundering in your name (by opening bank accounts) and taking debt in your name. Generally you won't even know this is happening until it's too late and debt collectors come. And it's not like you can revoke your biometrics/liveness check/selfie and who knows if revoking your passport/id card would actually work.
IMO it's much better if a dedicated KYC processor, like Persona, with actual security team/mindset, handles this rather than random website inside their zendesk instance. But there still needs to be extremely strict regulation surrounding this data.
Also while CC data will be getting less dangerous over time due to AI fraud detection and mandated 3DS, KYC data will IMO be getting more dangerous over time because more fintech/govtech will rely on it.
I think that biggest difference is that your client applications don't need to be explicitly configured to use the bastion server. For example ssh, web browsers, rdp, samba and so on can just pretend that you are inside the target network. Doubly useful if this is a "customer" network and you are working with multiple customers.
Oh wow, the guy used the word "versatility"... he even dared "narrative" and "just" - the latter one two times! Astonishing, does he have no shame copy pasting this obvious AI slop? It is obvious that no person in their right mind would utter such things!
But that's just classically styled library like bootstrap? How is it in any way similar to shadcn where you copy the component definitions to your code and restyle them with tailwind? It looks visually similar, but completely misses the point of why someone would use shadcn. Also many of the components have degraded functionality on firefox, I couldn't use this in an actual production application.
Personally I also tend to hate on what React has made the modern web, and I say this as someone who's made money for the past 10 years making React apps, but reimplementing half of something poorly and declaring success because it looks kinda similar when you squint is just silly. Many (most?) "pure html frameworks" are like this unfortunately.
I also wonder about it recently. Also in regards to Rust which is hailed as the great savior but has the same, minimal, approach to standard library and needs loads of dependencies.
Rust doesn't have a very broad stdlib, but it has an extremely deep stdlib. Rust's stdlib is huge for the things it provides. Classical JS's stdlib was neither deep nor broad.
Furthermore, tons of those "loads of dependencies" that people point to are crates provided by the Rust project itself. Crates like serde, regex, etc aren't third-party dependencies, they're first-party dependencies just like the stdlib.
Personally if I was offered 6+ months of severance I just couldn't justify staying even in the best companies I've been at.
reply