Serious security risk in modern browsers

[Hop2089]

Yeah, I disabled webgl as well, but I don't want to see a loss in performance...

Does anyone have examples of websites that use webgl?

There aren't any that are for the general public or in most corporations.

 

[Celice]

I checked my FireFox and I didn't see a Webgl in that list

I'm on 3.6.sometthing however. I got tired of updating all the time :

 

[Hop2089]

I checked my FireFox and I didn't see a Webgl in that list

I'm on 3.6.sometthing however. I got tired of updating all the time :

 

[WiiUBricker]

I can't find webgl.disabled in the firefox config.

In the bar near the top of the page, search "webgl"

I'm not lying. I did search "webgl", but it's not there.

 

[Minox]

Anyone using Firefox could also use Noscript to disable its use and only enable it on a per website basis if you would stumble upon a site that requires it.

 

[Hop2089]

Anyone using Firefox could also use Noscript to disable its use and only enable it on a per website basis if you would stumble upon a site that requires it.

There are no sites for public viewing that require it. Unless you wiork for the more classified areas of NASA or the military, there's no need to enable Webgl.

 

[shakirmoledina]

how big is the risk? arent browsers already risky in one way or another. but then again, u dont REALLY need it so cost/benefit says DO SOMETHING option (in regards to- remove it)

 

[fgghjjkll]

So, how do I disable WebGL in Opera? I'm quite surprised that this affects Linux systems too.

 

[Eckin]

it never worked for me in the first place

that aquarium was laggy as hell

 

[Creqaw]

So why was it enabled in the first place if nothing actually uses it >_>
Disabled.

 

[Cuelhu]

So, how do I disable WebGL in Opera? I'm quite surprised that this affects Linux systems too.

do you use an alpha or beta release? If not, you have no need to worry.

 

[cwstjdenobs]

So why was it enabled in the first place if nothing actually uses it >_>
Disabled.

It's going to be one of the next big things. With Chrome and Firefox a lot of the end users, especially the vocal ones, are also devs, so they want to play with the latest toys.

 

[ThePowerOutage]

Anyone using Firefox could also use Noscript to disable its use and only enable it on a per website basis if you would stumble upon a site that requires it.

There are no sites for public viewing that require it. Unless you wiork for the more classified areas of NASA or the military, there's no need to enable Webgl.

What do you think Webgl is? NASA and the Military? ATM, the places you will find this is with MMO/Website developers. I can't think of anyway this would help any Military.

 

[cosmiccow]

WebGL is per definition not more unsafe than Microsoft Silverlight or Adobe Flash. So every browser with one of these "plugins" is potentially at risk - including Internet Explorer.

http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-secur...osoft-bullshit/

 

[chris888222]

This vulnerable that vulnerable

Might as well don't use the web :/

 

[shadowmanwkp]

WebGL is per definition not more unsafe than Microsoft Silverlight or Adobe Flash. So every browser with one of these "plugins" is potentially at risk - including Internet Explorer.

http://games.greggman.com/game/webgl-secur...osoft-bullshit/

I'm sorry, but I really doubt the credibility of the source. The maker seems to have several conspiracy theories against microsoft, here's one of the quotes:

QUOTEIt’s even more telling that Microsoft hired a firm, ContextIS, to create this bogus FUD so they’d have someone to hide behind. It’s pretty convenient that only a few minutes after ContextIS’s latest post Microsoft already had a well manicured response. If ContextIS had any credibility they’d be posting about the same issues on Silverlight5 (warning: might crash your machine), Flash 11 and Unity3D.

Context was already researching on Webgl before, so it ain't very odd that they would have done more research. He also gets way off topic by discussing directx and opengl, before returning to the subject. He also mentions vulnerabilities in windows files, which once again bear no meaning on the subject of internet explorer having no webgl, because it has almost nothing to do with it. I know that the article is also on microsoft's stupidity, but I can't help but think that this was written in a few minutes while the writer was angry and one of the main points is on webgl. He does come up with some very good arguments though, but one can doubt if his arguments hold water very well... I also followed some of the links and at least one of the links ends up on a google search, thus it ain't a very good text....