Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Development, Privacy, and Standards for Chrome

Posted by Soulskill on from the chrome-chrome-chrome-chrome-chrome dept.

Continuing our coverage of Google Chrome, snydeq points out an Infoworld story about looking at the new browser from a developer's perspective, and another about how WebKit should be the focus of development efforts, rather than the browsers that use it. TGdaily notes that Chrome's search box will fetch all types of data, and can be made to display banking information with little effort. ABC and coderrr have slightly more paranoid articles questioning Google's commitment to privacy. NetworkWorld suggests that Chrome's unique process model (explained here) will require the development of new measurement standards.

9 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Completely good and noble by foniksonik · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Uh... Webkit doesn't have vulnerabiities it has bugs... the browser is what has vulnerabilities. Webkit has no network stack... it can't communicate. All it can do is accept input and render output.

    The javascript engine can have vulnerabilities because of XMLHttp, cookies and filesystem access... but even then it passes all comms through the browser or directly through the filesystem.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  2. Gears and the storage API by Simon+(S2) · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So google stripped the HTML 5 standard local storage api from Webkit to use their own implementation Google Gears. Why? The api was already there, and it worked, so they had to strip it out to go with google gears, their own, not w3c compliant. I think they are starting to become evil.

    --
    I just don't trust anything that bleeds for five days and doesn't die.
    1. Re:Gears and the storage API by David+Gerard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see no reason not to assume stupidity instead of malice. Remember, they started writing this as a pure Windows application they now have to try to port to Mac and Linux (registry twiddling, DLL hell, etc), rather than writing it cross-platform from the outset - there's copious evidence of stupidity along the way. Developers set free to go "not invented here, I could sooo roll my own better" is hardly unique to Google ...

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
  3. Bug by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Indexing of HTTPS pages is most certainly a bug. Did the poster of the article report it to make Google Chrome a better product or is he just going to complain? It's only in beta.

    And the work around is simple: Use Incognito mode for all sensitive work. Which is what it's for.

    1. Re:Bug by DancesWithBlowTorch · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's only in beta.

      I don't accept this excuse from Google, because they have effectively destroyed the concept of a beta version. Even gmail is still in beta, and it's probably among the world's top three email providers now.

      Google, please do official releases of your products. Or, if you really need to childishly continue to call them development versions, invent a new category. Maybe, call them "gamma" versions. You are spoiling a useful metaphor for everyone else.

    2. Re:Bug by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

      We feel for you man, but it's a beta, nothing we are required to, er, can do.

      I wouldn't be too sure about that. I know where you're coming from, and ordinarily I'd agree, but I think if someone wanted to push the point a court would probably be sympathetic to the argument that it really isn't a beta any more - it's been in extensive, public use for far too long, and as another poster points out is probably one of the top 3 email providers. Just slapping on a label that says "this shit might break" doesn't necessarily save you.

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
  4. Re:Completely good and noble by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't see why a rendering engine can't have security vulnerabilities, just like any other software which processes input from an untrusted source.

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  5. It works with Wine... here's the recipe by dkegel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://wiki.winehq.org/Chrome https is not yet supported, but page loading speed isn't bad.

  6. Re:WTF? by Your.Master · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know the whole problem with IE started when it became the only rendering engine in town?

    We all benefit if Webkit, KHTML, Gecko, Presto, and yes, even Trident are upgraded.