justinschuh

5 ms·

1.
by justinschuh 9y ago
> The network stack has been out of the content process for a super long time, it is not a new thing. FWIW, Chrome's network stack doesn't live in the content process either. It's not currently sandboxed, but it's in
2.
by justinschuh 9y ago
I don't keep up too much on Safari these days, so congrats on moving the network stack out of the content process. But looking at the current WebProcess seat-belt policy and what gets initialized, it looks like there's still far t
3.
by justinschuh 9y ago
Indeed. Fixed now, and thanks for letting me know.
4.
by justinschuh 9y ago
Just to add some context, on macOS you can look at the seat-belt policy as a rough analog of for basic sandboxing guarantees, where the fewer exceptions you have the stronger your sandbox is. From that perspective, Chrome's policy has
5.
by justinschuh 9y ago
So, the thing we call "win32k lockdown" on Chrome is just a term for the various things we had to do to enable ProcessSystemCallDisablePolicy on our sandboxed renderer processes (the processes that handle Web content). ProcessSyst
6.
by justinschuh 9y ago
Yup. Our only closed source bits at this point are Flash and the Widevine CDM (DRM), both of which can be disabled from: Settings -> Content Settings.
7.
by justinschuh 10y ago
There's no reason for FUD. We've always listed all potential data transmission or collection in this regularly updated whitepaper: https://www.google.com/chrome/browser/privacy/whitepaper.htm...
8.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Please don't spread misinformation. Here are the facts: 1. While the Hotword module was downloaded at startup, the feature was not activated without the user explicitly enabling it via the settings menu. < https://crbug.co
9.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Really? Repeatedly? So, I'm sure you can produce a citation to this effect?
10.
by justinschuh 10y ago
> when riseup.net got an NSL to give access to the email accounts This is simply not true. An NSL cannot be used to compel access to any communication content—and certainly not control of an account; they're limited solely to metada
11.
by justinschuh 10y ago
No worries. :)
12.
by justinschuh 10y ago
I think you may be confused about who you're replying to and what subject you're replying on.
13.
by justinschuh 10y ago
I think we've seen it once so far, for a Flash exploit that didn't have a sandbox escape in Chrome.
14.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Obama's first term was a firehose of this kind of hate from Beck: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/beck-compares-obama-to-the-nazis... I actually watch Fox with some regularity and follow various conservative news sour
15.
by justinschuh 10y ago
No, all we have right now are projections, which put Clinton at ~2% lead in the popular vote. We won't have final vote counts until probably December, because many millions of outstanding votes are still uncounted. The same thing happe
16.
by justinschuh 10y ago
I wonder whether you actually read the article you linked, because here's how he tries to shift the blame and deny his own accountability: >Now, I’ve got people on the left accusing me of creating Donald Trump. And I’m like, “But I’
17.
by justinschuh 10y ago
A non-free pass would mean Beck actually took responsibility for his actions and apologized rather than than attempt to excuse himself with false equivalence. Let's be clear, he baselessly demonized Obama's presidency while the ma
18.
by justinschuh 10y ago
That video was posted back in March, during the Republican primaries. I have no idea why you think it's related to the protests this week.
19.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Mentioning BadUSB very much implies confusion about the threat models at play. That is, the threat model for BadUSB is a malicious device that attacks the host OS, drivers, or applications. Whereas, the threat model for WebUSB is concerned
20.
by justinschuh 10y ago
This response just doesn't make sense given that modern OSes expose USB through much higher-level device management and communication APIs. Those are the APIs browsers use, and I've already explained that browsers shouldn't u
21.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Sorry, you seem to have misread my statement. Everything you just listed are devices that the OS already natively binds. I'm not aware of anyone considering WebUSB implementations that would unbind native devices and expose them to the
22.
by justinschuh 10y ago
Sorry, but I'm at a loss for what you believe you're responding to here. I made a clear, factual statement regarding the handling of bound USB devices for known devices and classes. Specifically, HID and other native device classe
23.
by justinschuh 10y ago
That's not at all an accurate framing. I'm not aware of any implementation that plans to allow access to HID devices (keyboard, mouse, etc.) or other device classes that are already handled natively by the browser/OS. Even ig
24.
by justinschuh 10y ago
This particular restriction is intended to address things like authentication devices (e.g. gnubby) where you basically destroy the entire security model if a user accidentally allows a malicious website to connect to it. That stated, the l
25.
by justinschuh 11y ago
No. We currently mostly do process-per-tab, but it gets complicated depending on how exactly a given window/tab was opened and certain resource heuristics. We're moving to process-per-origin[1], largely for the security improvemen
26.
by justinschuh 11y ago
Here's my stock response to these vulnerability counting reports: https://plus.google.com/+JustinSchuh/posts/CNEgtJWYTb5
27.
by justinschuh 11y ago
Ars just put up a decent article with some background, and explained how to reset your recovery keys (even on the Home edition): http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/12/micros... I have a lot of
28.
by justinschuh 11y ago
I think people misperceive "security fixes" as a binary thing when it's really a sliding scale. The choice to backport is often not a clearcut decision, and you need to balance the risk of the underlying issue against the pot
29.
by justinschuh 11y ago
That's exactly what we do. In this case it will start showing up in Chrome 48 with a link to the support page.
30.
by justinschuh 11y ago
Tavis' work isn't enough to significantly improve the quality of any of these "security" products -- that would take a big investment that isn't really feasible for a third-party. Honestly, he's just demonstrat

More ›