|
|
|
|
|
by IceDane
957 days ago
|
|
I'm sorry.. but is this for real? This is like an afternoon of work, and it's more or less a carbon copy of the existing tools. No one will care about any of the features you are describing. How much time do you think people spend on debugging JWTs? Then you also went and added AI integration of all things. This lets me wait 10 seconds to let GPT tell the definitions for each part of the JWT, which don't change. You could have just replaced it with a map from the claims to their purpose as defined by the RFC(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7519#section-4.1.3). Not to mention how unfathomably silly it is to talk about security and whatnot and then just send people's JWTs off to some third party. |
|
Yeah, that's lost on me. Why not embed it as a string? Seems quite lazy, as the current solution would presumably eat up all their OpenGPT credits.
That, and I would have preferred an explainer from someone who understands JWT. Another obvious disadvantage of using AI is that the response can change over time, so it has the potential to hallucinate.
> This is like an afternoon of work, and it's more or less a carbon copy of the existing tools. No one will care about any of the features you are describing. How much time do you think people spend on debugging JWTs?
This seems a bit dismissive, though. Let's see how many people use it before making broad judgements like that. It comes across as rude and unnecessary.