3 ms·

It'd be remarkable if it wasn't used for spying, given the history of features added to web Javascript. When has an API that gives JS access to more data or dev

by asark 8y ago

It'd be remarkable if it wasn't used for spying, given the history of features added to web Javascript. When has an API that gives JS access to more data or device capabilities not been used in this way? Often spying's among the top use cases in the wild for a new feature. At a minimum it'll be another dimension for fingerprinting.

jchw 8y ago
This feature requires consent before it does anything at all, similar to location requests.
- ben_jones 8y ago
  Cambridge Analytica technically had "consent".
  - jchw 8y ago
    This is not about technical consent, or misleading people. It is about a dialog that pops up when a page wants to access a specific Bluetooth device, and it has to know what kind of device beforehand. Webpages don't just get free reign to scan and access devices. I'm sure a lot of people also don't realize that Google Chrome has had, for many years, an extension API for accessing USB devices. Has it been a problem? No. This is just another communication protocol. It's reasonable for browsers to provide a strictly controlled environment to utilize it.
    - ben_jones 8y ago
      Yes it's a problem. My 85 year old grandmother was redirected to a strange website and was prompted for a series of chrome permissions, including to her computer's audio system. Conditioned to accept internet prompts from legitimate companies, she accepted and was then threatened and harassed verbally until in a panicked frenzy she gave the "voice" her banking and other personal information. Google, Facebook, and many other technology companies, have conditioned users to click 'Yes' and 'Accept All' and 'Share' such that we can no longer use such prompts to block malicious actors from our computer systems. I do not trust software engineers to make the correct choice between "ooh a cool feature" and the general well being and privacy of their users. There has been too much precedent and incentivization for the former, including massive profit and promotional tracks.
      - jchw 8y ago
        That really has nothing to do with your initial assertion and frankly is dealing with an entirely unrelated problem. I can't untangle all of the things being conflated here.

by asark 8y ago

jchw 8y ago

This feature requires consent before it does anything at all, similar to location requests.

ben_jones 8y ago
Cambridge Analytica technically had "consent".
- jchw 8y ago
  This is not about technical consent, or misleading people. It is about a dialog that pops up when a page wants to access a specific Bluetooth device, and it has to know what kind of device beforehand. Webpages don't just get free reign to scan and access devices. I'm sure a lot of people also don't realize that Google Chrome has had, for many years, an extension API for accessing USB devices. Has it been a problem? No. This is just another communication protocol. It's reasonable for browsers to provide a strictly controlled environment to utilize it.
  - ben_jones 8y ago
    Yes it's a problem. My 85 year old grandmother was redirected to a strange website and was prompted for a series of chrome permissions, including to her computer's audio system. Conditioned to accept internet prompts from legitimate companies, she accepted and was then threatened and harassed verbally until in a panicked frenzy she gave the "voice" her banking and other personal information. Google, Facebook, and many other technology companies, have conditioned users to click 'Yes' and 'Accept All' and 'Share' such that we can no longer use such prompts to block malicious actors from our computer systems. I do not trust software engineers to make the correct choice between "ooh a cool feature" and the general well being and privacy of their users. There has been too much precedent and incentivization for the former, including massive profit and promotional tracks.
    - jchw 8y ago
      That really has nothing to do with your initial assertion and frankly is dealing with an entirely unrelated problem. I can't untangle all of the things being conflated here.