7 ms·

Chrome Remote Desktop for Linux

127 points by vfclists 12y ago

tdicola 12y ago
Nice to see this was finally added. I remember trying this when I got a Chromebook earlier in the year and was really surprised and puzzled to see the lack of support on Linux. There's even a year+ old thread about it that didn't look good: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/VT2_wLZ3ppc https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/VT2_wL... Great to see support now!
bitL 12y ago
How does this differ from running a VNC client inside any browser?
- martinald 12y ago
  It is more like a VNC server than a client.
- dudus 12y ago
  If you try it out you'll notice that it's just better. I don't know the internals of it, but I suppose it uses more modern codecs for transmitting the screenshare. The experience just feels a lot snappier.
- vfclists 12y ago
  It probably has its own intermediate proxy which doesn't require firewall configuration? It is probably better optimized as well.
  - panzi 12y ago
    It probably has its own intermediate proxy with a "lawful" intercept interface (i.e. pies everything to the NSA). Well, I wouldn't be surprised if that conspiracy theory would be true.
    - ossreality 12y ago
      Absurd nonsense. I have as much reason to believe that panzi is breaking into my house at night and fondling me.
    - masto 12y ago
      I wouldn't be surprised if that's a load of bullshit.
      - panzi 12y ago
        Well, I don't know about that, but it is law that services over a certain size have to have a lawful intercept interface (e.g. Skype has one) and it is know that this interface gets abused by secret services.
- georgemcbay 12y ago
  VNC (even the various 'Tight', 'Lite', 'Whatever' variants) is horribly slow -- usable in a pinch, but every UI/UX interaction is just delayed enough that nothing feels 'right'. Chrome Remote is much more responsive, it feels more like Windows Remote Desktop Protocol speeds, perfectly usable almost as if you were local. Also it does initial connection handshaking so if you login to chrome from machine B and machine A is already set up for Chrome remote you can just connect there via a list of endpoints without having to know the external-facing IP address and/or setting up firewall tunneling.
skizm 12y ago
Finally. Now all 3 of my environments are now supported. I can start downloading games/movies at work and get home to a fully installed game or movie ready to go.
- brunoqc 12y ago
  You could use a torrent client with a web interface and Steam's remote install feature.
isaacdl 12y ago
I wish there was a better way for deal with screen resolution. I know that scrolling is a pain, but I'd still prefer it to default to the resolution of the physical display attached to the host computer. (Actually, I'd really prefer it to adopt the resolution of the client machine, a la MS Remote Desktop, but that probably introduces a lot of complexity).
- stinos 12y ago
  I'd really prefer it to adopt the resolution of the client machine Even broader: any resolution you want. I genuinely have always wondered what is at the bottom of this problem. Why is it that on an otherwise so versatile and configurable OS it is seemingly so hard to change the resolution when logged in remotely? Is it something in X that makes it like that? Was it originally never meant for headless use? Having used, and cursed the fixed resolution of, VNC for years I still remember the first time I used rdp on Windows, my jaw was like on the floor. That is how it should be: logging in without being bound to a hardware screen, and in a seperate session (latter needs a fix though since the default client on non-server windows doesn't allow it)
  - isaacdl 12y ago
    Yeah, I had the same reaction with RDP - pure magic.
  - laymil 12y ago
    There are several versions of VNC that support xrandr resizing. Arch documents this working with TigerVNC [0]. Additionally, you can use xrdp + x11rdp. [0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/xrandr#Using_xrandr_with_VNC https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/xrandr#Using_xrandr_wit...
  - TD-Linux 12y ago
    Weston's RDP backend supports any resolution as well as being a separate session, so it's coming. It's basically an X limitation.
  - rlvesco7 12y ago
vfclists 12y ago
This is the first time I got to know about it from frequenting r/Chrome for help with customization. Just like all most Google products it looks like it requires both parties to be logged into their Google accounts, so concerns about Google's privacy policies are still valid with it. PS. Does it use websockets?
seanmcelroy 12y ago
What an interesting way to encourage users to stay logged into Chrome all the time. Who needs cookies anyway? http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324807704579083723267549160 http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142412788732480770...
- LeoPanthera 12y ago
  Ironically, that story is behind a paywall.
AaronFriel 12y ago
Do features like Chrome Remote Desktop give anyone else goosebumps? I love that Chrome automatically updates with security and performance updates. But an IT professional and someone who is security conscious, it's concerning that users' web browsers automatically install new attack vectors. I'm sure the NSA, every other three letter agency, and skillful botnet programmers and hackers are just tickled that Chrome is opening up new avenues for infection. Here's the how-to if you have some spare Google account credentials: 1. Install Chrome and sign in with target's credentials 2. Enable Chrome extension sync 3. Install Chrome remote access extension 4. Wait 5. ??? 6. Profit! Welp, at least Chrome for Windows has group policies to control (some) of this, but the policies often lag behind the new features. Chrome for Linux users? I guess they're SOL. Hope your company's administrators have init.d locked down or something to prevent Chrome from installing its hooks into your system during a regular apt-get/yum update. Edited in P.S.: Google, are you there? Are you listening? As a system administrator, what would tickle me would be the ability to freeze the attack surface area of user's machines. i.e.: they can't install new extensions and apps, they won't have any features that add new remote access features enabled, etc. I would like to be able to say, "I trust my ability to lock down Google Chrome 37", configure that, and not have to worry about an automatic update annihilating my security policies. Finally, automatic extension updates give me the creeps. At any moment, bam, suddenly my users' harmless extension is now owned by Shady Joe's Botnets 'R' Us, and their passwords, web traffic, and safety is compromised.
- isaacdl 12y ago
  I tend to agree with you. But in your hypothetical case, what's different about a someone (the NSA, etc) installing Chrome and enabling the RA extension vs just installing another remote access tool?
  - thefreeman 12y ago
    Well in the second scenario, they would hypothetically still need to infect you with the RAT. In his scenario, you're already installed version of Chrome will infect you without your knowledge when it silently syncs the new Remote Desktop extension into your existing installation. Obviously if they have your Google credentials you are in a world of trouble, and I have no doubt if a 3 letter agency wanted to infect me they could, but the scenario he brings up is still troublesome and not at all restricted to highly technical attackers.
darkstar999 12y ago
Anyone know how to get this running on Linux Mint?
- fiatjaf 12y ago
  https://plus.google.com/+NickMossie/posts/TB32wTtMSZS https://plus.google.com/+NickMossie/posts/TB32wTtMSZS
jebblue 12y ago
I tried it, had issues installing it, here's what I did: 1) Tried sudo dpkg -i chrome-remote-desktop_current_amd64.deb 2) It complained about missing dependencies. 3) I tried aptitude and one of its choices was to remove the Linux kernel, nah. 4) So I ran my trusty Synaptic and it immediately detected the broken package, I clicked Fix, Apply, and it worked fine. It seems quite responsive.
hocuspocus 12y ago
I'm really confused. I've been using this extension to take remote control of my mom's computer, running Ubuntu, for like 2 years or so. And it didn't require to install a .deb besides the extension. Am I missing something?
aceperry 12y ago
Yeah baby!!! For LINUX, woot! Love it when linux gets cool tools like that.
chambo622 12y ago
Awesome to have this, will definitely set this up on my desktop. Kind of crazy that this got released and we still don't have a Google Drive client for Linux.

127 points by vfclists 12y ago

Nice to see this was finally added. I remember trying this when I got a Chromebook earlier in the year and was really surprised and puzzled to see the lack of support on Linux. There's even a year+ old thread about it that didn't look good: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/VT2_wLZ3ppc https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/chrome/VT2_wL... Great to see support now!

bitL 12y ago

How does this differ from running a VNC client inside any browser?

martinald 12y ago
It is more like a VNC server than a client.
dudus 12y ago
If you try it out you'll notice that it's just better. I don't know the internals of it, but I suppose it uses more modern codecs for transmitting the screenshare. The experience just feels a lot snappier.
vfclists 12y ago
It probably has its own intermediate proxy which doesn't require firewall configuration? It is probably better optimized as well.
- panzi 12y ago
  It probably has its own intermediate proxy with a "lawful" intercept interface (i.e. pies everything to the NSA). Well, I wouldn't be surprised if that conspiracy theory would be true.
  - ossreality 12y ago
    Absurd nonsense. I have as much reason to believe that panzi is breaking into my house at night and fondling me.
  - masto 12y ago
    I wouldn't be surprised if that's a load of bullshit.
    - panzi 12y ago
      Well, I don't know about that, but it is law that services over a certain size have to have a lawful intercept interface (e.g. Skype has one) and it is know that this interface gets abused by secret services.
georgemcbay 12y ago
VNC (even the various 'Tight', 'Lite', 'Whatever' variants) is horribly slow -- usable in a pinch, but every UI/UX interaction is just delayed enough that nothing feels 'right'. Chrome Remote is much more responsive, it feels more like Windows Remote Desktop Protocol speeds, perfectly usable almost as if you were local. Also it does initial connection handshaking so if you login to chrome from machine B and machine A is already set up for Chrome remote you can just connect there via a list of endpoints without having to know the external-facing IP address and/or setting up firewall tunneling.

skizm 12y ago

Finally. Now all 3 of my environments are now supported. I can start downloading games/movies at work and get home to a fully installed game or movie ready to go.

brunoqc 12y ago
You could use a torrent client with a web interface and Steam's remote install feature.

isaacdl 12y ago

I wish there was a better way for deal with screen resolution. I know that scrolling is a pain, but I'd still prefer it to default to the resolution of the physical display attached to the host computer. (Actually, I'd really prefer it to adopt the resolution of the client machine, a la MS Remote Desktop, but that probably introduces a lot of complexity).

stinos 12y ago
I'd really prefer it to adopt the resolution of the client machine Even broader: any resolution you want. I genuinely have always wondered what is at the bottom of this problem. Why is it that on an otherwise so versatile and configurable OS it is seemingly so hard to change the resolution when logged in remotely? Is it something in X that makes it like that? Was it originally never meant for headless use? Having used, and cursed the fixed resolution of, VNC for years I still remember the first time I used rdp on Windows, my jaw was like on the floor. That is how it should be: logging in without being bound to a hardware screen, and in a seperate session (latter needs a fix though since the default client on non-server windows doesn't allow it)
- isaacdl 12y ago
  Yeah, I had the same reaction with RDP - pure magic.
- laymil 12y ago
  There are several versions of VNC that support xrandr resizing. Arch documents this working with TigerVNC [0]. Additionally, you can use xrdp + x11rdp. [0] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/xrandr#Using_xrandr_with_VNC https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/xrandr#Using_xrandr_wit...
- TD-Linux 12y ago
  Weston's RDP backend supports any resolution as well as being a separate session, so it's coming. It's basically an X limitation.
- rlvesco7 12y ago

vfclists 12y ago

This is the first time I got to know about it from frequenting r/Chrome for help with customization. Just like all most Google products it looks like it requires both parties to be logged into their Google accounts, so concerns about Google's privacy policies are still valid with it. PS. Does it use websockets?

seanmcelroy 12y ago

What an interesting way to encourage users to stay logged into Chrome all the time. Who needs cookies anyway? http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324807704579083723267549160 http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142412788732480770...

LeoPanthera 12y ago
Ironically, that story is behind a paywall.

AaronFriel 12y ago

Do features like Chrome Remote Desktop give anyone else goosebumps? I love that Chrome automatically updates with security and performance updates. But an IT professional and someone who is security conscious, it's concerning that users' web browsers automatically install new attack vectors. I'm sure the NSA, every other three letter agency, and skillful botnet programmers and hackers are just tickled that Chrome is opening up new avenues for infection. Here's the how-to if you have some spare Google account credentials: 1. Install Chrome and sign in with target's credentials 2. Enable Chrome extension sync 3. Install Chrome remote access extension 4. Wait 5. ??? 6. Profit! Welp, at least Chrome for Windows has group policies to control (some) of this, but the policies often lag behind the new features. Chrome for Linux users? I guess they're SOL. Hope your company's administrators have init.d locked down or something to prevent Chrome from installing its hooks into your system during a regular apt-get/yum update. Edited in P.S.: Google, are you there? Are you listening? As a system administrator, what would tickle me would be the ability to freeze the attack surface area of user's machines. i.e.: they can't install new extensions and apps, they won't have any features that add new remote access features enabled, etc. I would like to be able to say, "I trust my ability to lock down Google Chrome 37", configure that, and not have to worry about an automatic update annihilating my security policies. Finally, automatic extension updates give me the creeps. At any moment, bam, suddenly my users' harmless extension is now owned by Shady Joe's Botnets 'R' Us, and their passwords, web traffic, and safety is compromised.

isaacdl 12y ago
I tend to agree with you. But in your hypothetical case, what's different about a someone (the NSA, etc) installing Chrome and enabling the RA extension vs just installing another remote access tool?
- thefreeman 12y ago
  Well in the second scenario, they would hypothetically still need to infect you with the RAT. In his scenario, you're already installed version of Chrome will infect you without your knowledge when it silently syncs the new Remote Desktop extension into your existing installation. Obviously if they have your Google credentials you are in a world of trouble, and I have no doubt if a 3 letter agency wanted to infect me they could, but the scenario he brings up is still troublesome and not at all restricted to highly technical attackers.

darkstar999 12y ago

Anyone know how to get this running on Linux Mint?

fiatjaf 12y ago
https://plus.google.com/+NickMossie/posts/TB32wTtMSZS https://plus.google.com/+NickMossie/posts/TB32wTtMSZS

jebblue 12y ago

I tried it, had issues installing it, here's what I did: 1) Tried sudo dpkg -i chrome-remote-desktop_current_amd64.deb 2) It complained about missing dependencies. 3) I tried aptitude and one of its choices was to remove the Linux kernel, nah. 4) So I ran my trusty Synaptic and it immediately detected the broken package, I clicked Fix, Apply, and it worked fine. It seems quite responsive.

hocuspocus 12y ago

I'm really confused. I've been using this extension to take remote control of my mom's computer, running Ubuntu, for like 2 years or so. And it didn't require to install a .deb besides the extension. Am I missing something?

aceperry 12y ago

Yeah baby!!! For LINUX, woot! Love it when linux gets cool tools like that.

chambo622 12y ago

Awesome to have this, will definitely set this up on my desktop. Kind of crazy that this got released and we still don't have a Google Drive client for Linux.