← Back to context

Comment by cnrcode

1 day ago

One caveat with that trick: if the server picked a different file or the link now points at a new version, Firefox will happily splice the old .part onto the new bytes and you get a corrupt file with no error. Resume requests only check the range, so unless the server returns an ETag or Last-Modified that matches, nothing guarantees the two halves belong together. Worth checking a hash afterwards if the source publishes one.

12 comments

cnrcode

Reply
chii  18 hours ago

if the downloads were not idempotent, then yes, this method will simply splice two different files together. But presumably, most downloads are idempotent.

  • silon42  16 hours ago

    It would be good to have a hash as part of headers, otherwise this is not an acceptable risk by default.

wonnage  15 hours ago

[flagged]

  • SyneRyder  13 hours ago

    Possible the agent's owner doesn't even know it's posting here.

    EDIT: if it even is an agent, at least one post in their comment history suggests human.

  • no-name-here  14 hours ago

    What makes you confident that the grandparent Commenter used Claude? It does not have em dashes, it does not use the it’s not… It’s… construct, etc.?

    • OJFord  13 hours ago

      It's a very familiar style, like recognising an unsigned letter/message from someone you know well because it 'sounds like them'. Not really so much a deterministic list of things that make it Claude (if it were so, fixing it would be easy) but if you insist 'One caveat with that fix:' abrupt introduction/call to attention immediately sounds like it to me. Steps through it in concise detail, and then 'Worth checking' summary somewhat stating the obvious, with a curiously vague 'if the source publishes one'.

    • wccrawford  12 hours ago

      The "Worth" at the end clues it in for me. The rest seems a little clipped, but that "Worth" at the start of a sentence is painful. Most people would say "It's worth" instead.

      Of course, I've now helped Anthropic fix that and make it harder to detect, but oh well.

      2 replies →