this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2024
439 points (96.2% liked)
Technology
59378 readers
3817 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Ah any reason why Firefox decided not to include WebSerial?
Good news, I guess?
https://github.com/kuba2k2/firefox-webserial
I've only used it to do some esp32 stuff with homeassistant, but it does work.
I've also used this for the esp32 and firefox and it worked just fine in that case
I believe this is one of those Google "F it I am going to make this protocol my own way without anyone else's input" which results in security concerns and also Mozilla prioritizes it being a browser more.
Searching serial looks like this is still the case. There are security and privacy concerns over it.
https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/
For those not wanting go search:
Mozilla's Position
Devices that offer serial interfaces often expose powerful, low-level functions over the interface with little or no authentication. Exposing that sort of capability to the web without adequate safeguards presents a significant threat to those devices. A user deliberately installing a site-specific add-on may be adequate, given sufficiently understandable consent copy.
Seems reasonable to me.
Google mainly built this WebSerial shit because they HAVE TO to make Chrome OS more than just a useless web browser.