5 ms·

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?ke

by mpldr 3y ago

https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chromium https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=chrome https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=firefox https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=webkit Those are the main reasons. And seeing how browsers are essentially designed to run other peoples code with minimal to no vetting processes, I consider this a serious issue.

kajaktum 3y ago
So how is this any different if we don’t have a browser? People still want to visit “websites” which in your world is even worse. Because now every website is a distinct application (yikes!). The problem is that people are willing to run arbitrary code in the first place. How many times have _you_ as a developer, run arbitrary scripts from the internet? Blindly accepts packages that you have not vetted?
- shrimp_emoji 3y ago
  Too many to count. Remember Flash? ;)
- mpldr 3y ago
  I would be very different if browsers were tools to view documents though. I am not saying that browsers don't have a purpose. I just question that browsers should answer the question about what their scope is with a loud "yes!"
saiojd 3y ago
Thanks for sharing, that's interesting angle that I did not consider. So essentially the argument goes that more "surface area" == more vulnerabilities? While that makes perfect sense, don't you feel like the pressure for more feature comes from somewhere? By analogy, dynamic languages like JS/Python make the job of people writing the compiler much, much harder. But, on the whole and despite all their flaws, it is true that they increased productivity by a lot.

by mpldr 3y ago

kajaktum 3y ago

So how is this any different if we don’t have a browser? People still want to visit “websites” which in your world is even worse. Because now every website is a distinct application (yikes!). The problem is that people are willing to run arbitrary code in the first place. How many times have _you_ as a developer, run arbitrary scripts from the internet? Blindly accepts packages that you have not vetted?

shrimp_emoji 3y ago
Too many to count. Remember Flash? ;)
mpldr 3y ago
I would be very different if browsers were tools to view documents though. I am not saying that browsers don't have a purpose. I just question that browsers should answer the question about what their scope is with a loud "yes!"

saiojd 3y ago

Thanks for sharing, that's interesting angle that I did not consider. So essentially the argument goes that more "surface area" == more vulnerabilities? While that makes perfect sense, don't you feel like the pressure for more feature comes from somewhere? By analogy, dynamic languages like JS/Python make the job of people writing the compiler much, much harder. But, on the whole and despite all their flaws, it is true that they increased productivity by a lot.