3 ms·
A few corrections: 1. Chrome has always had a multi-process architecture, with at least one dedicated process for each tab's renderer (which hosts the v8 runti
by IX-103 4y ago
A few corrections:
1. Chrome has always had a multi-process architecture, with at least one dedicated process for each tab's renderer (which hosts the v8 runtime).
2. Chrome was already in the process of moving cross-origin iframes to separate processes when Spectre was announced. The announcement of Spectre style vulnerabilities just significantly increased the pace of implementation and deployment.
- kentonv 4y agoYes, I didn't mean to imply that Chrome wasn't multi-process all along. But Chrome historically used it more for fault isolation (= crashing one tab doesn't crash them all) rather than security isolation. Historically window.open() would (usually) open a new tab that actually ran in the same process, and iframes ran in the same process, so getting any arbitrary site running in the same process as yours was easy.
- aboodman 4y ago1/ is not correct. I worked on Chrome for many years. Processes were frequently reused across tabs for many reasons, including the window.open() example that kenton mentioned earlier, but also just resource exhaustion.