4 ms·
If you read the article, you'd know they're blocking all embedded browser frameworks, including CEF. Embedded chrome has the same security risks. This isn't a p
by madrox 6y ago
If you read the article, you'd know they're blocking all embedded browser frameworks, including CEF. Embedded chrome has the same security risks. This isn't a partisan policy, nor is punting responsibility to the end user to make decisions always better. Even as an educated engineer, you have no way of evaluating whether that embedded browser is doing something nefarious with your login data or not unless it's open source, which few mobile apps are. Non-actionable warnings are meaningless.
- andyroid 6y ago> Non-actionable warnings are meaningless. Agreed. Yet that’s exactly what they’re trying to make use of here. “The browser must not try to impersonate another browser like Chrome or Firefox.”
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoBut again, there's a double-bind here. Option 1: Remove UA spoofing, presumably Google will allow sign-in. However, Youtube and Gmail won't work. Option 2: Keep the UA spoofing, lose ability to sign in to Google. There's literally no way to comply. This is super, super anti-competitive, and I guess I'll have to figure out which MEP/Commission person I need to complain to (as they appear to be the only regulator likely to care).