News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-app browser.

Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by madrox on Thursday August 18, 2022 @07:50PM (#32516177)
I feel like there is a litany of the internet: "that which can be collected will be." That's been true since the beginning. What continues to surprise me is that people think only "bad guys" do it.

This is why we continue to lock down browsers and provide ever narrower permission classes.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by netheril96 on Thursday August 18, 2022 @09:45PM (#32516853)
What surprises me is that this is technically possible on iOS.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by MBCook on Thursday August 18, 2022 @11:03PM (#32517230)
It’s an abuse of a feature, in a way. There are certainly non-evil use cases for the feature being used here.

But as we know, that which can be used by advertising/tracking people will be used by them.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by Evan_Hellmuth on Thursday August 18, 2022 @07:53PM (#32516200)
People only care when "bad guys" do it
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by dinkledunk on Thursday August 18, 2022 @07:55PM (#32516212)
That's because only "bad guys" do this. If a "good buy" does this, they automatically become a "bad guy".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by headsoup on Thursday August 18, 2022 @08:03PM (#32516269)
I think madrox is referring to 'good guys' as in Western countries vs China etc, not literal good guys and bad guys. That's a fairly common view, regardless of all the actual bad Western country leaderships' conduct.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:See what JavaScript commands get injected through an in-a... by toomanydoubts on Thursday August 18, 2022 @08:04PM (#32516274)
I think I agree with you here. It's proof by definition.
[ Parent | on HN ]