Live data from Hacker News

Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

techradar.com

31–40 of 357 posts

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#31
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding keychain for password filling, you can choose to disable it in the settings -> passwords -> options. It’s selected by default but if you tap it it will deselect it.

It would be nice if it disabled itself when another password manager is installed...

Or at least asked you outright when installing a new one; "Please choose a default app to perform this function: Password Management" and then show you a list of currently installed ones (+ the newly installed one of course)…

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#32
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding keychain for password filling, you can choose to disable it in the settings -> passwords -> options. It’s selected by default but if you tap it it will deselect it.

It would be nice if it disabled itself when another password manager is installed...

Many of us use more than one (especially shared use with work) and the default behavior seems correct.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#34

Without commenting on the claims, it's interesting to consider how times have changed. Microsoft originally lost an antitrust lawsuit [1] over little more than tying Internet Explorer into their OS and not readily including alternatives. They not only lost that case, but the initial judgement was that the company was to be broken up. Microsoft started spending dramatically more money on "lobbying" following that. [1]…

Microsoft got smacked because they weren't playing ball with Washington politics, they weren't bribing enough congressmen nor capitalizing on their market dominance to make themselves strategically useful to national interests. Since then, big tech companies have known to grease the gears and befriend power brokers in Washington. They now contribute to political campaigns, and have made themselves useful to the defense and intelligence sectors.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#35

Does Firefox have a future? I'm writing this from Firefox, having used it ever since the days when Firefox releases used to have launch parties, and tabs was the revolutionary killer feature. Let me rephrase the question: does Gecko/Spidermonkey have a future? I think it's clear the Firefox branding will live on, since it is Mozilla's crown jewel. But in today's landscape, you can target WebKit (Apple) and V8/Blink (…

Maybe it's just the contrarian streak in me, but Firefox being on Gecko is why I haven't left. There must be more than just one browser engine to rule them all! We got rid of our trident just to get blinkered.

Firefox moving to Blink means I'm just hopping over to whoever has the slickest Chromium clone right now.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#36
On Android all Google apps default to opening in Chrome with no option to change it, even if you change the default URL configuration that only seems to work outside of Gmail / News Feed. This also applies to their search widget, which you cannot remove at all.

Incredibly frustrating end user experience when I have everything in FireFox, and Adblock too.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#37
While Google, Microsoft, and Apple clearly factor into the equation here (especially Google — when Chrome first came out the marketing for it was a real force to contend with, and they've aggressively pushed Chrome ever since), the other big thing is that Mozilla ceased to be a leader. They started chasing Chrome and put Firefox on the back burner, and now they're reaping what they've sown.

I am a huge proponent of web engine diversity, but Mozilla is going to have to do some serious self-reflection and enact major changes internally to have a fighting chance. As things stand, even if regulation limiting MS/Google/Apple's abilities to self-promote went into place it will make precious little difference because Firefox gives few reasons for non-technical users to switch to it. As big of a splash as Manifest V3 has been, it's ultimately a storm in a teacup that only a portion of technical users know and care about.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#38
post #12

One of the next frontiers as a barrier to browser switching will be "software"-backed WebAuthn/FIDO2/"passkeys". If you look at the APIs available on MacOS/iOS at present [0], and how WebAuthn works, you need to "trust" the client-side software to correctly identify the site origin (i.e. protocol, domain, port) and pass it to a physical security key. In the case of a software token, you need to restrict which app(s)…

Is there any chance that third party password managers like Bitwarden and 1Password will be able to implement add-ons and apps that replace this functionality, and that could open up migration paths? Or is the passkey future even worse than I feared?

I believe 1password will implement passkeys at some point in the future. However that doesn't take away from the concern that passkeys are designed from the ground up to ensure vendor lock-in (there almost certainly won't be a way to migrate passkeys from Apple's or Google's keychains to 1password). With passwords there is a clear, if insecure, fallback -- simply copy the password over. With passkeys, you're subject to Big Tech's whims.

It is not possible to take anything Apple or Google do in this area to be in good faith.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#39
post #12

One of the next frontiers as a barrier to browser switching will be "software"-backed WebAuthn/FIDO2/"passkeys". If you look at the APIs available on MacOS/iOS at present [0], and how WebAuthn works, you need to "trust" the client-side software to correctly identify the site origin (i.e. protocol, domain, port) and pass it to a physical security key. In the case of a software token, you need to restrict which app(s)…

Is there any chance that third party password managers like Bitwarden and 1Password will be able to implement add-ons and apps that replace this functionality, and that could open up migration paths? Or is the passkey future even worse than I feared?

Certainly - WebAuthn is an open standard, and passkey appears to just be "passwordless FIDO2" (all open standards) with shiny branding around it.

That means anyone can implement it, including a physical token (which can be entirely open source, like the solokeys dongle).

The real concern here is friction for the "average end user" - passkeys IMHO are a net-good thing, as long as we don't see this result in everyone regressing towards "single factor auth" in some way. As it stands though, WebAuthn/Passkey gives you a level of phishing resistance that ought to raise the bar on compromising accounts.

The part I do fear about third party password managers is that they'll potentially end up lowering the level of security that WebAuthn heralded, by normalising pure "software" authenticators - putting TOTP seeds into bitwarden alongside passwords feels like putting all your eggs in one basket, even if it's a reasonably good basket. A physical WebAuthn key gives you a level of hardware isolation (limited attack surface, time-bounded attack surface, physical contact required per-authentication) that will be lost if everyone moves to software-based tokens.

On the other hand, if people are replacing a globally re-used password with a "passkey", it's a lot better. If they are replacing a hardware token with a software token, that's a small step backwards. If most people are still manually using the same password everywhere, it's probably a net step forwards.

Re: Mozilla claims Apple, Google and Microsoft force users to use default browsers

#40

Does Firefox have a future? I'm writing this from Firefox, having used it ever since the days when Firefox releases used to have launch parties, and tabs was the revolutionary killer feature. Let me rephrase the question: does Gecko/Spidermonkey have a future? I think it's clear the Firefox branding will live on, since it is Mozilla's crown jewel. But in today's landscape, you can target WebKit (Apple) and V8/Blink (…

>Does Firefox have a future?

Well, mobile is the future of computing. Does Firefox have a future on mobile? I think the answer is clearly no.

Firefox will be relevant only until the Desktop PC paradigm fades into obscurity.

Eventually Chrome and Safari will join Firefox in obscurity, as more content moves behind apps and walled gardens, and as the desktop paradigm falls into disuse.

Give it 10 years.

Post reply on HN