3 ms·
Yay for strongly coupled components. After all, when your pdf-reader crashes it should take your online banking session down with it. Browsers need to go to th
by gizmo 18y ago
Yay for strongly coupled components. After all, when your pdf-reader crashes it should take your online banking session down with it.
Browsers need to go to the one-process-per-web-page model if they ever want to be taken seriously. The whole concept of multiple (possibly hostile) apps living in the same memory space is madness. If you keep finding vulnerability after vulnerability, guess what? You're doing it wrong. And with a decoupled, bare-bones approach to browsing advancements such as local inter-page communication become feasible, because the security model can be so much simpler.
Situation: 1 browser, N pdf-reader like plugins. Result: not only can vulnerabilities in the pdf-reader affect the browser, a vulnerability in, say, flash, can affect the pdf-reader. So every component can affect every other component. Good luck with that.
- sah 18y agoDid you really mean to suggest that web browsers aren't taken seriously? I agree that one-process-per-web-page is at least a good metaphor, but I'm not sure those necessarily have to be real OS processes. If the OS can keep processes from stepping on each other's toes, why can't the browser do the same thing for web pages on its own?
- nertzy 18y agoDoesn't Internet Explorer have an option for this? I remember back in the dark ages when I used Windows that I would enable the multi-process feature.