21–30 of 107 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple need to move Safari to the App Store. A Browser only being updated with the OS in 2016 is ridiculous.
When you get 80%+ of your OS updated within 6 months this isn't so much of a problem.
At last. Where have they been all this time, under a rock? Does it mean they'll start supporting Opus as well?
Apple need to move Safari to the App Store. A Browser only being updated with the OS in 2016 is ridiculous.
As it has been said many times - they sell "experience", not merely products. Now, in today's tech market this is up for debate and fairly so, but people (the people who exclusively buy Apple products; in most cases because thsoe are Apple products) do believe they are buying that so called experience and what that experience lacks they explain to themselves as features.
How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address? It's part of the way WebRTC works so I can't see how that can be fixed. It's both a security issue and a key enabling feature. Update: It looks like Google Chrome (desktop) team has published a plugin that alleviates the problem but can cause performance degradations with apps that use WebRTC. They seem to suggest that a decent fix won't…
I don't have a full understanding of WebRTC, but AFAIK its a browser-to-browser connection library. How would that work without leaking the ip address? The browser at least has to know who to connect to?
Maybe in five or six years we'll get serviceworker too.
Service workers seems like an incredibly dangerous feature to have in a web browser. If developers need geofencing notifications or assets caching for example then implement a tightly focused API. But to allow any developer (including rogue ones) to slow the browser and computer down will be a nightmare for inexperienced and experienced users alike.
How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address? It's part of the way WebRTC works so I can't see how that can be fixed. It's both a security issue and a key enabling feature. Update: It looks like Google Chrome (desktop) team has published a plugin that alleviates the problem but can cause performance degradations with apps that use WebRTC. They seem to suggest that a decent fix won't…
I don't have a full understanding of WebRTC, but AFAIK its a browser-to-browser connection library. How would that work without leaking the ip address? The browser at least has to know who to connect to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a full understanding of WebRTC, but AFAIK its a browser-to-browser connection library. How would that work without leaking the ip address? The browser at least has to know who to connect to?
I don't really know anything about this topic, but the parent comment leads me to believe that you would use a UDP proxy to hide your address. Instead of sending out your address, you'd send out the proxy's address. When the proxy receives data, it would pass it to you. That way the other party doesn't know your address; they only know the proxy address. This is just a guess based on how I assume proxies would work,…
The site owner? Well, the site owner now has your IP!
How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address? It's part of the way WebRTC works so I can't see how that can be fixed. It's both a security issue and a key enabling feature. Update: It looks like Google Chrome (desktop) team has published a plugin that alleviates the problem but can cause performance degradations with apps that use WebRTC. They seem to suggest that a decent fix won't…
Yes, even if the user is behind a VPN, WebRTC will expose their ISP-given public IP. Luckily Firefox allows WebRTC to be disabled. Recently they added a new setting that alleviates that leak for the majority of VPN users, while allowing WebRTC to still be enabled. Would be awesome if Chrome allowed WebRTC to be disabled as well.
How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address? It's part of the way WebRTC works so I can't see how that can be fixed. It's both a security issue and a key enabling feature. Update: It looks like Google Chrome (desktop) team has published a plugin that alleviates the problem but can cause performance degradations with apps that use WebRTC. They seem to suggest that a decent fix won't…
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/discuss-webrtc/_5hL0...
This implements the behavior proposed to the IETF https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shieh-rtcweb-ip-handling-0...
How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address? It's part of the way WebRTC works so I can't see how that can be fixed. It's both a security issue and a key enabling feature. Update: It looks like Google Chrome (desktop) team has published a plugin that alleviates the problem but can cause performance degradations with apps that use WebRTC. They seem to suggest that a decent fix won't…
> How about the security issue with WebRTC where the browser leaks the IP address Yes, even if the user is behind a VPN, WebRTC will expose their ISP-given public IP. Luckily Firefox allows WebRTC to be disabled. Recently they added a new setting that alleviates that leak for the majority of VPN users, while allowing WebRTC to still be enabled. Would be awesome if Chrome allowed WebRTC to be disabled as well.