5 ms·
But it's part of the reason. It was also notorious for it's security flaws.
by dcbadacd 8y ago
But it's part of the reason. It was also notorious for it's security flaws.
- pjmlp 8y agoWebAssembly on its current state still doesn't prevent internal memory corruption, due to lack of bounds checking enforcement. Yes it does not escape the sandbox, however triggering stack corruption of local variables opens the door to explore changing the behaviour of function calls, while getting some goodies in the process. It remains to be seen how secure is WebAssembly at scale, when black hats start actually turning their sights into it.
- tracker1 8y agoGiven the runtime environment and limitations, I SERIOUSLY doubt WebAsm will be LESS secure than JavaScript's runtime in browsers itself.
- josefx 8y agoOne reason I liked flash: You could disable malicious ads with flashblock without breaking 90% of the internet. With the cancerous growth of JavaScript APIs embrancing and extending on all that made flash evil that is no longer possible.
- dcbadacd 8y agoThat train has sailed already anyways with JS, so I see no difference in that. Though I do expect websites to become more obfuscated - rendered by wasm so that adblocks and privacy protectors can't reach as well.
- pjmlp 8y agoFlash now lives as Animate CC, however I can easily see future Websites being something like an Unity export.