• FooBarrington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Honestly, this is such a shortsighted take. Awesome, instead of a simple “Allow?” dialogue to give the sandboxed website access to one specific USB device through an (over time) more and more well-tested implementation, we have to download untrusted binaries that by default get full access to large amounts of user data.

    What are you so afraid of? It’s already been live in Chromium browsers for a while, and the sky hasn’t fallen. And I’m convinced it has largely improved security for users who flash Arduino-like devices, smart home stuff, some phones and a bunch of keyboard/mouse stuff.

    • PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      57 minutes ago

      I don’t use Chromium browsers. I’m afraid of the sky falling (it is). I have been “afraid” of it for a good long while, and it is occurring.

      That’s general - in this specific case, by my reckoning, it can never be safe for a website to understand, in any depth, the hardware of the machine requesting it.