91–100 of 159 posts
What the fuck, this leaked your real IP behind VPN since January 2014 and this isn't fixed yet? This sure looks like a Heartbleed-tier high-priority security hole to me. How is this not bigger news?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation please.
Nothing to do with WebRTC but it's (allegedly) a tactic that has been used by a US-based LLC known as Prenda via torrents: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/pirate-bay-data-s... Earlier this week, Prenda faced a new and serious allegation: that it had actually put some pornography on BitTorrent itself, intending for it to be downloaded so that it could start a campaign of lawsuits and threat letters. The Pir…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> a random guy on the internet says something and you think it is true? Yes, if they identify themselves and their company and what they say aligns with my personal experience. > You don't have the foggiest idea what they are really doing with the data. All we know is that they are collecting the data without user's consent. You never have any absolute certainty what anyone does with your data - all you have are hypo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The web isn't peer to peer. Why would I want a web browser to do peer to peer? Its a web browser!
some people seem to mistake browsers for an operating system.
Whether that's a good idea or not is certainly open to debate, but pretending that it's not happening isn't the answer.
Does anyone else feel that there's something terribly odd going on when restricting something needs to be an extension ? IMHO it should be a configuration option, per-site, and off by default. WebRTC also isn't the only thing that applies to.
I have no idea what the W3C is thinking. I don't think even the W3C knows what its thinking. Its just being reactionary; trying to turn HTML5 into a "flash killer" and shoving feature after feature into the spec. I don't want to piss on progress, but I think privacy and security concerns get a backseat with W3C members, especially Google, whose very existence is dependent on finding information about users to sell to advertisers. Soon we'll need sandboxing and privacy apps to wrap our browsers in. I really hope Mozilla leads the way to pushing back on this recent mad push of thoughtless progress. A more moderate approach would be very much welcome and having more "off by default" options for easily abused features like P2P in the browser, which is what webrtc really is, makes sense.
Right now I had no idea what my browser is capable of. Can it silently turn on my camera and microphone? Probably. Can it make all sorts of crazy p2p connections to various servers/clients silently? Probably. Its all a little scary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> http://www.pcwelt.de/ratgeber/Die-Abmahnindustrie-Jeden-kann... Estimates of 500,000 yearly C&Ds in Germany from 2011. > http://www.wortfilter.de/news11Q1/news3945.html C&D industry in Germany makes about 400 million a year. Don't have numbers from other countries, but it's definitely a big business in Europe.
Those are about the Abmahnungen, no mention of honeypots.
Swarm information is not enough as it doesn't prove that any data has been transfered.
Chrome users, look here: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-block/nphkk... or https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-leak-preven...
How about not disabling it, but merely making use of it visible? (e.g. an icon or a notice in the addressbar) It would discourage reputable sites from abusing it, because users would start asking questions why a news site wants a p2p/videoconference connection.
Because if you really need to be anonymous, it's not good enough to catch it being used after the fact. Notifying the user after the fact sometimes works for things that are nuisances, but isn't good for privacy/security (imagine if your browser would execute unsandboxed JS and show you an icon each time it did it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
some people seem to mistake browsers for an operating system.
I'm pretty sure that ship has sailed. Users (and perhaps more important, companies) do, in fact, want web browsers to do everything. Even traditionally heavyweight applications like Microsoft Office and Adobe Photoshop are shifting to the web. Whether that's a good idea or not is certainly open to debate, but pretending that it's not happening isn't the answer.
It doesn't manage hardware or anything like that.
People use browsers as if they were an operating system. That does not make it one.
It's like calling a java virtual machine an operating system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation please.
Nothing to do with WebRTC but it's (allegedly) a tactic that has been used by a US-based LLC known as Prenda via torrents: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/06/pirate-bay-data-s... Earlier this week, Prenda faced a new and serious allegation: that it had actually put some pornography on BitTorrent itself, intending for it to be downloaded so that it could start a campaign of lawsuits and threat letters. The Pir…
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/06/judge-finds-prend...