Re: Some Feature requests.

> On 7 Aug 2019, at 14:05, Doug Moen <doug@moens.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019, at 10:35 PM, Myles C. Maxfield wrote:
>> We’ve heard this defeatist argument before and entirely disagree with it.
> 
> My point is that security designs by non-experts have a poor track record.
> I think fingerprinting security for WebGPU should be designed by a web browser fingerprinting security expert

We agree. This *is* advice from our Web Browser fingerprinting security experts.

It's not a secret that there are low-level techniques to identify hardware, and thus users. Their existence does not mean it is acceptable to provide high-level ways to identify hardware/users.

To give an analogy (that will probably cause more distraction than help, but whatever).... just because someone can throw a brick through your window doesn't mean you should leave your front door unlocked. Maybe some day you'll get brick-proof windows.

Dean


> , and I also think that you are trying to fix the problem at the wrong level of abstraction. The security should be provided at a level above the WebGPU API.

Received on Wednesday, 7 August 2019 20:04:02 UTC