NewsBite analysis · Programming, Tools
Dev.to
Undo almost never proves what it undid
The writer discusses the inadequacies of various undo, revert, and rollback features found in software applications. They explore the tension between state restoration and action provenance, concluding that most systems fail to offer independent verification of changes. While text editors and databases excel at reverting states, they do not securely log the changes made. The article emphasizes the importance of instilling trust in the undo functionalities users encounter, ultimately leading to a call for more robust solutions.
MonitorConfidence: MediumLong term horizon
Published 2 Sept 2026, 08:50 UTC4 min read
Visit original article ↗Lead image — Dev.to
Summary
TL;DR
- Critique of typical undo features in software.
- Difference between state restoration and action provenance.
- Text editors provide poor audit capabilities.
- Database rollbacks lack specificity regarding changes.
- Git revert offers a better but still flawed solution.
- AI-based undos pose new verification challenges.
Interesting facts
- Most undo features answer only the first question of restoring state without providing proof.
- A proposal for an escrow layer for better transaction verification illustrates potential advancements.