Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by ta8645 on Friday October 27, 2023 @05:17PM
(#38044081)
I was worried from the very start of the WASM tech, that it would lead to the end of the user-controlled client. You don't even really need an embedded browser, a motivated provider could create a completely proprietary protocol for rendering their pages.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by SoftTalker on Friday October 27, 2023 @05:41PM
(#38044376)
Back to the days of Flash / Silverlight websites?
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by EvanAnderson on Friday October 27, 2023 @05:18PM
(#38044089)
A browser is nice because the provider can continue to use their whole tech stack, hosting, dev tools, etc. Just wrap it in a proxy that only wants to talk to the "inner browser".
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by thriftwy on Friday October 27, 2023 @06:12PM
(#38044672)
That you can do trivially even today. Just show your web site using in-browser VNC client.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by hot_gril on Friday October 27, 2023 @06:28PM
(#38044835)
That's the final form. Kinda like video game streaming.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by autoexec on Friday October 27, 2023 @07:16PM
(#38045198)
Taking power away from the user seems to be a large part of the appeal of WASM. Wasn't it just a year or two ago that it was being reported that 75% of WASM modules are malicious? A a study from previous years had said 50% of all websites using it were malicious so the trend line isn't looking great.
I don't know how we got from "don't download and install random software from untrusted sources on your devices" to "let anyone with a website run code directly on your hardware. Sandboxes are impossible to breach!"
I get that it's cool tech and the promise of writing software to run on many different platforms is exciting, but from a real world/user perspective it's insane.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by armchairhacker on Friday October 27, 2023 @07:36PM
(#38045343)
> I don't know how we got from "don't download and install random software from untrusted sources on your devices" to "let anyone with a website run code directly on your hardware. Sandboxes are impossible to breech!"
The whole point of WASM is that it's the alternative to downloading and installing random software.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by nehal3m on Friday October 27, 2023 @07:40PM
(#38045372)
Wasn’t that your parents point though?
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by autoexec on Friday October 27, 2023 @07:43PM
(#38045395)
"Same malware, but with fewer steps" isn't exactly a win for WASM.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by minitech on Friday October 27, 2023 @10:24PM
(#38046510)
It has exactly the same potential in the control and code-running respects as (minified) JavaScript. It’s overrepresented in malware because it’s faster, i.e. better for cryptominers. (Many sandbox breaches come from JavaScript’s complexity.)
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by pests on Saturday October 28, 2023 @12:29AM
(#38047145)
Right, did everyone forget about ASM.js? We already had conpile-to-js, it was just a horrible subset of more efficient JS. WASM is just the extension and further development of that.
Re:Shadow: New browser engine made almost entirely in JavaSc...
by danielheath on Friday October 27, 2023 @07:42PM
(#38045386)
I’d argue that “JS as a compilation target” already did everything WASM could do.
It hasn’t been the end of the world, but it hasn’t been great either.