Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by isodude 46 days ago
Why not resolve everything with UNIX sockets instead, that way you can have them named and scoped instead, hiding behind port 443, since it's mosly HTTP anyway.
1 comments

Does this work in the browser? How will paths to different resources used by the web app work?
It depends on how you register things.

* Given that you can easily start up your own CA in a test bed, just use different domain names.

* Or use IP addresses directly, given that IPv6 i pretty abundant it's easy to just listen on many addresses at the same time. A nice thing is to just put the port number is the last octets: fd01::9000, fd01::0003:5565. If it's HTTPS you always use port 443, if it's another protocol, use another port. With iptables/nft you can translate all port 443 traffic towards a /96 to a single IP.

* Firefox does not seem to understand unix domain sockets, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27941552. I'm assuming that you have a gateway in front that handles that aspect.

* Proxies in Firefox seems to understand that though, which means you can have a proxy that translate to unix sockets locally. That means you can basically run it to a namespaced application, using only http://<service>.localhost.

works with curl, maybe there is a case to either build a proxy for UDS and expose them to a browser, or open a request ticket to browser maintainers to support UDS