Slashdot Mirror
Extension To Chrome Brings Remote Desktop Abilities
CNET reports that as of yesterday, a new Chrome extension will "let a person on one computer remotely control another across the network." The new remote-desktop capability is in BETA (Google's all-caps version, for emphasis), but is said to work to control any OS from any other OS, so long as both sides are equipped with Chrome and the new extension. Related: Wired is running a profile of
Rajen Sheth — "father of Gmail," and now in charge of Google's Chromebook project as well.
Sounds exactly like something I want my web browser to be able to do. What could possibly go wrong?
A new security vulnerability has been introduced that will be marketed as a useful feature that rarely gets used for its intended purpose.
Yeah, giving your browser the ability to completely control your machine. Brilliant idea. No possible exploits there!
This isn't going to be very useful if it requires a user to be already logged in to work.
It has just that limitation:
"Otherwise, what's the difference if one still has to install software on both systems to make it feasible?"
Well, given that TeamViewer starts at $700 for commercial use, I would say there is rather a large difference.
I presume you mean "this isn't going to be very useful to me".
I have supported loads of people who just need assistance doing something on their computer. Almost everyone bar you has helped family and friends with various computer tasks.
Sure you can do this with some existing technologies, but they tend to be either complex to set up or limited to a specific platform.
I'm sure that, if they can keep it secure, a free, easy to install, multi-platform remote desktop solution will be attractive to many on /.
Of course they do. Microsoft has been letting people control other people's machines through their browser for years.
Which part of a computer cannot go wrong?
If the number one consideration was always "what could possibly go wrong?" we'd still be shitting in the bushes and wiping our butts with leaves.
If god didn't want us to take chances, he wouldn't have given us fingers to cross.
You are welcome on my lawn.
It sounds like it could be an alternative to WebEx, for those who use it for remote support.
It beats the hell out of trying to get most adults to follow simple verbal instructions.
Ever work a technical support job? After explaining to an otherwise educated person (i.e. educated stupid) for the fifth time that when you ask him to "right-click with the right mouse button" it is not the same as "double-click (with the left)" you start thinking about remote desktop yourself.
Thankfully that was a long time ago. After a while, you stop thinking of involuntary sterilization as a viable option.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
As an Archos Jukebrick fan myself, the innovative part that the iPod brought was bringing the technology to a functional level of convenience. The iPod was the first one that fit in your pocket.
I'm not going to be able to explain to my mother how to get an ssh server up and running on her machine. But getting Chrome installed with an extension? That I could believe.
The key is *enabling.* Twenty years ago, setting up an FTP based home file synchronization service was technically possible. But it was a huge PITA. DropBox automated everything with a simple single login. Similarly, simplifying VNC into something that everyone already has. That means that people who wouldn't have exposure to remote control, now do.
The ______ Agenda
Yeah, thinking like that is what gave us Melissa.
When you design software, you can either design with security as part of the architecture or not. Secure software designs still have problems, but it's the difference between a pinhole and a barn door.
Unix systems were much more secure than Windows systems for years (whether they are now is up to debate). The reason is that Microsoft had to take drastic measures over more than a decade to secure their system was because their architecture was never designed with security in mind. Unix didn't have the problem - as a multiuser system, security was part of the design, so replacing insecure pieces with secure components (think rsh -> ssh, crypt() to md5(), shadow, etc.) was much easier.
In order to have a remote desktop application be part of a web browser, you need to break the security of the browser and reach the base system. I don't know how the extension framework for Chrome works (I only use it for webcomics), but I would definitely think twice before installing something like this onto a piece of software that regularly communicates with untrusted data (which is primarily what a web browser does).
Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach either, do tech support.
This time it isn't the user's fault, it's you who misunderstands him. He's left handed, the right button is under his index finger. His right button is your left button.
My former gf is a lefty, and I went through the same thing. The terminology is at fault -- rather than "right click" the term should be "middle finger click".
Free Martian Whores!