Live data from Hacker News

WebUSB Extension for Firefox

github.com

51–60 of 264 posts

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#51

Well, this seems like a terrible idea. I really don't want websites to be able to access hardware. I am already uncomfortable with the webcam access.

Whether we like it or not, the distinction between an app and a web page has already eroded, and is, and only will be, eroding more.

Even for local apps it's starting to become common to ship the app in an interpreted language where the interpreter is a browser instead of say python & qt.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#52
People are starting to ship even local apps only in the form of some html & js that only works on Chrome because only Chrome has webusb.

Whether we like the idea of the browser having access to usb or not, I at least like even less the idea of being forced to install and use Chrome for the same reasons as the bad old days of being forced to use IE.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#53
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you make sure that technically illiterate people don't just click away the requestDevice() popup? IMHO a browser offering device level USB access is a security nightmare and there is no way this can ever be made safe and convenient at the same time.

Isn't that the same excuse Gooogle is using to lrevent folks from installing what they want on Android phones?

I do not agree with Google on preventing apk installation. But unknown apk is a different risk profile than letting unknown entities to access local usb devices.

The main issue in the former case is that google is posing itself as a gatekeeper instead of following a repo model like Debian or FreeBSD. That’s wanting control over people’s device.

Allowing USB access is just asking to break the browser sandbox, by equating the browser with the operating system.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#54
post #42
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The security implications of not having WebUSB are having to install untrustworthy native drivers every time you want to interface with a USB device.

why would you be using untrustworthy hardware to begin with?

everyone has a different threshold at which they would consider something 'untrustworthy'

Curious what your floor is for 'trustworthy', a company with a US headquarters? Personally I feel sketched out by any silicon not made in Sweden or Japan, so, pretty much all of it.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#55
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The security implications of not having WebUSB are having to install untrustworthy native drivers every time you want to interface with a USB device.

Sounds like something that could have a standalone usb-driver-container or special chromium fork for the 0.00001% of users that need it instead of bloating every browser with yet another niche API and the inevitable security holes it will bring.

People are already doing that in the experimental embedded world, and let me tell you, it's pain. True and utter pain. You're going to fight different versions of libusb's userland being installed, Windows/macOS/Linux kernel occupying the device with a default driver (cough rtl_sdr) and a whole lot of other messes.

Or some things aren't even available made using libusb. Think control applications for RGB lights in keyboard and mice. There's a certain manufacturer all but mandating installation of its slopware. Being able to provide all of this as WebUSB has advantages.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#56
post #47
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> breaking computing for everyone else How is not implementing a Draft spec, which may compromise security badly, breaking computing? Overreacting much?

This is not just an isolated incident, it's the whole trend of limiting capabilities in the name of security and that's what I was referring to. However in this particular case, even the security argument doesn't hold, either I: a) know that I want to use USB - in that case I'll switch browsers or download a native binary (even more unsafe), it's not that I'd decide that I no longer want to flash my smartphone b) I d…

So instead of using trusted vendors or requiring tools with auditable code, we just allow everyone to be able to access the user’s devices?

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#57

WebUSB is so great. I can ship a cross-platform application that accesses a hardware device without having to deal with all the platform specifics, and with decent sandboxing of my driver. I think one way to make it more "secure" against unwitting users would be to only support WebUSB for devices that have a WebUSB descriptor - would allow "origin" checking.

Yep. FlipperZero, Android, now some random chinese handheld radio - just some of the things I didn't have to install some crap unsandboxed app to flash in the last 3 months. Absolutely revolutionary.

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#59
post #11
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you make sure that technically illiterate people don't just click away the requestDevice() popup? IMHO a browser offering device level USB access is a security nightmare and there is no way this can ever be made safe and convenient at the same time.

You can ask them to type one of the following sentences: "I know what I'm doing, and giving a random website access to my USB host is the right thing to do." "I'm an idiot."

I love this because the idiots would type out that they know what they're doing and the pros would save time by typing "I'm an idiot."

Re: WebUSB Extension for Firefox

#60

WebUSB is so great. I can ship a cross-platform application that accesses a hardware device without having to deal with all the platform specifics, and with decent sandboxing of my driver. I think one way to make it more "secure" against unwitting users would be to only support WebUSB for devices that have a WebUSB descriptor - would allow "origin" checking.

Yep, I’ve bought a few thermal printers recently and webusb support (marketed as Chromebook support) was a major deciding factor. Thermal printers aren’t well supported by built in printer drivers, so it’s nice to not have to install some questionable driver software with access to my whole computer and instead have a sandboxed chrome extension with enumerated permissions. I’ve also poked around the extensions’ minified js source out of curiosity and as a basic security audit

It was also nice trying out some RTL-SDR apps as soon as I got it without having to figure out how to build and install the Debian packages from source first.

It drives me nuts every time I have to switch from Firefox to Chrome to use webusb or webserial.

Post reply on HN