<oembed><type>rich</type><version>1.0</version><title>William Casarin [ARCHIVE] wrote</title><author_name>William Casarin [ARCHIVE] (npub1d7…93exj)</author_name><author_url>https://yabu.me/npub1d7e068ud72v0au6xf53qvek44eccfhlgnhzuclf6za6hnxrvx89sc93exj</author_url><provider_name>njump</provider_name><provider_url>https://yabu.me</provider_url><html>📅 Original date posted:2018-06-27&#xA;📝 Original message:Hey Andrew,&#xA;&#xA;If I&#39;m reading the spec right: the way it is designed right now, you&#xA;could create hundreds of thousands of zero bytes in the input or output&#xA;key-value arrays. As far as I can tell this would be considered valid,&#xA;as it is simply a large array of empty dictionaries. Is this right? I&#39;m&#xA;worried about buffer overflows in cases where someone sends a large blob&#xA;of zeros to an unsuspecting implementation.&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;Also, the extensibility section reads:&#xA;&#xA;&gt; Additional key-value maps with different types for the key-value pairs&#xA;&gt; can be added on to the end of the format.&#xA;&#xA;&#34;different types for the key-value pairs&#34;, is this referring to new&#xA;types beyond the current global, input and output types?&#xA;&#xA;&gt; The number of each map that follows must be specified in the globals&#xA;&gt; section&#xA;&#xA;Is this out of date? Since there is only one type in the global section&#xA;now (tx).&#xA;&#xA;&gt; so that parsers will know when to use different definitions of the&#xA;&gt; data types&#xA;&#xA;I&#39;m not sure what this means.&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;Thanks!&#xA;&#xA;Will&#xA;&#xA;&#xA;--&#xA;https://jb55.com</html></oembed>