3 ms·

Both Safari and Firefox are stubborn on that one (and most other hardware APIs), and for good reasons.

whywhywhywhy 4y ago
They can code working security models for other features so fingerprinting isn't a good reason. Firefox is actually looking at WebMidi now so they've clearly had a change of heart. Apple will never do it because it means you can make hardware devices that interact with iPhones without going through the App Store.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > They can code working security models for other features so fingerprinting isn't a good reason. And those working security models are? > Firefox is actually looking at WebMidi now so they've clearly had a change of heart. They didn't have a "change of heart". They most likely found a way to implement it the way it aligns with their position.
  - JanSt 4y ago
    Pop up a dialog asking for permission to scan for devices.
    - dmitriid 4y ago
      That's not a working security model when it's required for about a dozen such permissions (camera, mike, location, bluetooth, serial ports, midi, ambient light, gyroscopes, hid, ...) Chrome doesn't care and pushes these out. Safari and Mozilla: protections in these specs are inadequate for the large surface area and complexity that these APIs require
      - mtomweb 4y ago
        That’s a week cop out from Apple when they offer far less protection in Native and allow apps to use Bluetooth to monitor your location. Web Bluetooth has much BETTER security and privacy than native. By not providing functionality it forces apps to use the AppStore.
        dmitriid 4y ago
        > That’s a week cop out from Apple Too bad Mozilla also thinks the same way. > By not providing functionality it forces apps to use the AppStore. Nice conspiracy theory. I wonder if Mozilla execs are in on it.
        mtomweb 4y ago
        Mozilla seems to have come around with WebMIDI, so thats a good step in the right direction. The functionality is not limited to device APIs, it covers every aspect of the browser. See: https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#hobbled-competition-even-within-safari-clones https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#hobbled... and https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#missing-functionality https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#missing...
        dmitriid 4y ago
        > Mozilla seems to have come around with WebMIDI And yet, we are in a thread about WebBluetooth. Both Safari and Mozilla have the same stance: until a proper solution for privacy issues with hardware specs is found, we oppose them. For WebMIDI it seems Mozilla has found a solution they are happy with. I wouldn't hold mu breath for others. The links you provided assume Mozilla is in on Apple conspiracy, too. It's also a very one-sided take which completely ignores the elephant in the room. See this: https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_the_we.html https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_th...
        mtomweb 4y ago
        Web Bluetooth is significantly safer than native bluetooth + the safest car is the one that doesn't start is not a good direction for the web.
    - mtomweb 4y ago
      FYI only native signs a blank cheque and lets you scan for devices in the background. Web Bluetooth requires the browser itself to connect to a device and specify a service for you to connect too.
- JanSt 4y ago
  They might be forced to if the EU makes them to open up to other browser engines. I can see that happening
  - mhoad 4y ago
    Seems like that is set to become a reality thankfully https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/26/apple_ios_browser/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/26/apple_ios_browser/ Frankly, I think it’s either the worlds biggest coincidence or the only reason we are seeing any effort from Apple to start playing long overdue catch-up on the web now is because regulators started sniffing around.
    - mtomweb 4y ago
      It’s not a coincidence, Apple just didn’t have any motivation to invest in Safari until the threat of competition came along. The increased investment is great for Safari and the web, now we just need some core functionality to support mobile web apps and I think we could really see it take off.
    - corrral 4y ago
      If the rest of the market were healthy, I'd be happy about this, but it's really, really not healthy. Apple's the only entity keeping Google from dictating web standards for everyone, and mobile Safari, specifically, is the only reason they have enough leverage to be able to do that. This will trade a monopoly on one tiny slice of the market (web browser engines—not web browsers, just the engine—on iOS devices) for Google having the whole pie.

They can code working security models for other features so fingerprinting isn't a good reason. Firefox is actually looking at WebMidi now so they've clearly had a change of heart. Apple will never do it because it means you can make hardware devices that interact with iPhones without going through the App Store.

dmitriid 4y ago
> They can code working security models for other features so fingerprinting isn't a good reason. And those working security models are? > Firefox is actually looking at WebMidi now so they've clearly had a change of heart. They didn't have a "change of heart". They most likely found a way to implement it the way it aligns with their position.
- JanSt 4y ago
  Pop up a dialog asking for permission to scan for devices.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    That's not a working security model when it's required for about a dozen such permissions (camera, mike, location, bluetooth, serial ports, midi, ambient light, gyroscopes, hid, ...) Chrome doesn't care and pushes these out. Safari and Mozilla: protections in these specs are inadequate for the large surface area and complexity that these APIs require
    - mtomweb 4y ago
      That’s a week cop out from Apple when they offer far less protection in Native and allow apps to use Bluetooth to monitor your location. Web Bluetooth has much BETTER security and privacy than native. By not providing functionality it forces apps to use the AppStore.
      - dmitriid 4y ago
        > That’s a week cop out from Apple Too bad Mozilla also thinks the same way. > By not providing functionality it forces apps to use the AppStore. Nice conspiracy theory. I wonder if Mozilla execs are in on it.
        mtomweb 4y ago
        Mozilla seems to have come around with WebMIDI, so thats a good step in the right direction. The functionality is not limited to device APIs, it covers every aspect of the browser. See: https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#hobbled-competition-even-within-safari-clones https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#hobbled... and https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#missing-functionality https://open-web-advocacy.org/walled-gardens-report/#missing...
        dmitriid 4y ago
        > Mozilla seems to have come around with WebMIDI And yet, we are in a thread about WebBluetooth. Both Safari and Mozilla have the same stance: until a proper solution for privacy issues with hardware specs is found, we oppose them. For WebMIDI it seems Mozilla has found a solution they are happy with. I wouldn't hold mu breath for others. The links you provided assume Mozilla is in on Apple conspiracy, too. It's also a very one-sided take which completely ignores the elephant in the room. See this: https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_the_we.html https://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2021/08/breaking_th...
        mtomweb 4y ago
        Web Bluetooth is significantly safer than native bluetooth + the safest car is the one that doesn't start is not a good direction for the web.
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    FYI only native signs a blank cheque and lets you scan for devices in the background. Web Bluetooth requires the browser itself to connect to a device and specify a service for you to connect too.
JanSt 4y ago
They might be forced to if the EU makes them to open up to other browser engines. I can see that happening
- mhoad 4y ago
  Seems like that is set to become a reality thankfully https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/26/apple_ios_browser/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/26/apple_ios_browser/ Frankly, I think it’s either the worlds biggest coincidence or the only reason we are seeing any effort from Apple to start playing long overdue catch-up on the web now is because regulators started sniffing around.
  - mtomweb 4y ago
    It’s not a coincidence, Apple just didn’t have any motivation to invest in Safari until the threat of competition came along. The increased investment is great for Safari and the web, now we just need some core functionality to support mobile web apps and I think we could really see it take off.
  - corrral 4y ago
    If the rest of the market were healthy, I'd be happy about this, but it's really, really not healthy. Apple's the only entity keeping Google from dictating web standards for everyone, and mobile Safari, specifically, is the only reason they have enough leverage to be able to do that. This will trade a monopoly on one tiny slice of the market (web browser engines—not web browsers, just the engine—on iOS devices) for Google having the whole pie.