1065
Google Chrome’s plan to limit ad blocking extensions kicks off next week (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
357 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Reminder to switch browsers if you haven't already!

  • Google Chrome is starting to phase out older, more capable ad blocking extensions in favor of the more limited Manifest V3 system.
  • The Manifest V3 system has been criticized by groups like the Electronic Frontier Foundation for restricting the capabilities of web extensions.
  • Google has made concessions to Manifest V3, but limitations on content filtering remain a source of skepticism and concern.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 years ago (4 children)

"WebUSB is a JavaScript application programming interface specification for securely providing access to USB devices from web applications"

Holy Hannah, NO!!!!

Might as well allow a website to direct write to your hard drive unprompted again.

Does noone see how BAD this stuff is?

Stop creating attack vectors with glowing neon signs on them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Web engines are nearly OSs at this point. It's aready possible to flash a phone ROM in two clicks with a webpage. Most apps are also already rendered in browser engines anyway, that includes things like steam. The APIs might sound evil until your favorite FOSS project uses them to make your life better.

    Unfortunately, if Mozilla refuses to implement stuff like PWAs or advanced APIs it's locked out of that side of innovation both good and bad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's aready possible to flash a phone ROM in two clicks

    That's precisely the kind of access that a web browser should NEVER, EVER have.

    If you think 2 stage download keylogger apps getting into app stores is bad, wait until it can be done with a banner ad. Or by viewing a comment on a post.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago*

    You have to specifically permit it on a per site basis, it's not like a website has those permissions by default. If a banner ad or forum post could enable that permission then they'd be able to access your camera as well as a plethora of other permissions?

    I don't see any difference between downloading code to run in a web browser vs downloading and running ADB. In fact, running software in a web browser is more sandboxed and with more fine tuned permissions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent