15 ms·
> the old protocol was very suitable It wasn't, because I've managed to lose my history with it. I very much prefer my history to be synchronized to a server I
by bad_user 10y ago
> the old protocol was very suitable
It wasn't, because I've managed to lose my history with it. I very much prefer my history to be synchronized to a server I cannot lose.
If your objection is not about cloud storage, then your objection isn't about the protocol, but its implementation (e.g. usage of HTML/Javascript): https://github.com/mozilla/fxa-auth-server/wiki/onepw-protocol https://github.com/mozilla/fxa-auth-server/wiki/onepw-protoc...
> you download the browser once
That's not true. Modern browsers are set to upgrade automatically in the background, without notifying the user.
If you're paranoid, you can self-host your own Sync server, but then if you don't trust the vendor of your browser, then you've got bigger problems and I hope you're compiling your own binaries.
- wtbob 10y ago> Modern browsers are set to upgrade automatically in the background, without notifying the user. My browser isn't; I use the Debian Firefox package and update it on my schedule. > If you're paranoid, you can self-host your own Sync server Only if you host it locally; if you host it at a VPS/dedicated-system provider then you're trusting that provider never to break into your system. It's bad social hygiene to develop systems which are breakable.