• the_weez@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      That’s actually a limitation on the Firefox side, they just flat out refuse to implement webusb. Any webapp that works with usb devices does the same thing. I’ve raged at Mozilla about this the last time they asked for my feedback and had no response.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        57
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 months ago

        WebUSB is absurd and shouldn’t exist. Web apps should not ever be able to work with USB devices! The core concept is wrong!

        A website shouldn’t even be allowed to know if I have a USB port at all, let alone anything else about my hardware. I’m not even convinced it should be allowed to know the viewport size of the browser window! All these APIs just make the attack surface fucking gargantuan and open up infinite opportunities for browser fingerprinting. They should be Considered Harmful and abolished.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          2 months ago

          It is super helpful for flashing a pixel to GrapheneOS, especially for non technical folk

        • the_weez@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          On the one hand I agree with the sentiment, but how else is a web based update app for a usb device supposed to work?! We can make an argument for fwupd or a custom built app but the webapp is a smaller barrier for a lot of hardware companies.

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            2 months ago

            how else is a web based update app for a usb device supposed to work?!

            It’s not! It’s a thing nobody in their right mind should want to do in the first place!

            That question is like asking “how else is a shotgun-based dental pick supposed to work?” The things just don’t go together and you shouldn’t try to force them to!

            Also, we already had an appropriate technology for this sort of thing (having a cheaply-made app that runs everywhere and doesn’t have to be pretty): it’s called “plain old fuckin’ Java.”

    • dgdft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 months ago

      not said is that their online updater only works with chromium based browsers

      Currently, it only supports Chromium-based browsers.

      Second paragraph, yo.

    • thingsiplay@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I refused to install a Chromium based browser until recently, which was needed as a dependency for some software. At least it supports the base Chromium, which is free from all those bullshit of the other browsers its based on. I just recently updated the driver in a virtual machine with Windows 10 and their software installed. So using Chromium would be an improvement here. Still sad I have to use a different browser than Firefox, but Chromium will be just my “firmware-updater” and not my browser at all.