3 ms·

I agree with Microsoft’s assessment that WebGL is a severe security risk. The gfx driver culture is not the culture of security. ~ https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Ca

• randall 15y ago
  Carmack goes on to say that he prefers NaCl (as in Native Client) for webgl like applications. Any thoughts from someone who's more informed than me?
  • bd 15y ago
    NaCl bindings to HW accelerated 3d share the same issues (like any other technology using GPU acceleration including Molehill, Silverlight or Unity). Carmack tweeted the same: "doing GL ES from NaCL is clearly just as dangerous as WebGL" http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81767700447236096 http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/81767700447236096 In theory, you could do software rendering in NaCl, but that wouldn't produce as good results as GPU, despite NaCl being more powerful than JavaScript (for example SwiftShader DirectX9 SW renderer scores 620 on 3DMark06 on pretty beefed up quadcore [1], my 2 year old notebook GPU scores over 4000). So the question is not "is WebGL secure?", question is "are benefits of HW accelerated 3d on the web worth the risks?". To which IMHO the answer is resounding yes. Problems are minor, benefits are major. [1] http://transgaming.com/business/swiftshader/faq/ http://transgaming.com/business/swiftshader/faq/