[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Public WebGL] Information leakage and the extension regisrty.
----- Original Message -----
> What I will do is that I will talk with JS engine people when I can.
> Implementing a 'privacy sensitive' bit on JS variables is the only way
> that I can conceive this whole problem getting fixed without crippling
Scrap this, that was a stupid last-minute idea. Can't work. So I don't have the start of a solution for this general problem. But my point is that this is not a WebGL-specific problem.
> > You're proposing to reduce the margin by 5 or 6 bits - meaning that
> > the
> > bad guys can identify an individual down to one person in 16 to 32
> > (right
> > now, it's one person in 2048 or so). I believe that's an
> > underestimate
> > today...but let's suppose you're right.
> > As the years go by that number will be eroded to zero by a
> > combination
> > of
> > (a) new WebGL extensions and (b) other browser features that'll leak
> > information. Some of those - such as geometry shaders and the
> > Mozilla
> > extensions for touch-screen detection - are already coming - so
> > pretty
> > soon it won't be 5 to 6 bits but 7 to 8 - and other browser
> > improvements
> > will push several more bits - and the game is over.
> > If continue we work this way - we WILL lose the battle to avoid
> > server-side evercookies within a year.
> > So - we need to take a cold, dispassionate view here and either
> > admit
> > that
> > and stop with this business of shutting off important information to
> > the
> > application - or we have to come up with a different way to
> > represent
> > hardware capabilities that hides MUCH more information - and permits
> > future growth without more leakage. Tricks such as grouping a bunch
> > of
> > capabilities into one "level of performance" indicator that your
> > hardware
> > either meets or doesn't meet...kinda like Microsoft do with DirectX
> > versioning and "shader model N" and marking old hardware as
> > "obsolete"
> > in
> > order that we don't have to describe it to the application.
> > > By contrast, the RENDERER/VERSION strings give 13 bits right
> > > away, and moreover allow user categorization as Oliver noted.
> > But once you've leaked more than just a couple more bits - that's
> > irrelevant because you've already leaked enough to give away the
> > farm.
> > Rationally, we don't give a damn whether the total leakage is 31
> > bits
> > or a
> > thousand bits...but we (perhaps) do care if we can keep it down
> > below
> > (say) 24 bits.
> > > Furthermore,
> > > as Vladimir noted, the RENDERER string had the (to many people,
> > > even
> > > more
> > > important) problem that it was going to create a new
> > > user-agent-string
> > > epic.
> > That's the way both DirectX and OpenGL have always worked on the
> > desktop -
> > and it hasn't caused any terrible grief as a result.
> > > So I don't have a particular problem with extensions as they
> > > currently are
> > > looking like.
> > I don't see how can you reconcile that view with the simple
> > numerical
> > truth above.
> > -- Steve
> You are currently subscribed to firstname.lastname@example.org.
> To unsubscribe, send an email to email@example.com with
> the following command in the body of your email:
You are currently subscribed to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe, send an email to email@example.com with
the following command in the body of your email: