alt Hacker NewsThis is why most of the browsers rejected these specs. They are super useful, but the security risks are incredible. Most USB devices were not designed to hold up to being exposed to the internet.
Replies
Note that when you say “rejected”, Mozilla’s position has actually shifted a bit. At the end of 2022, it shipped MIDI in the form of an extension that it will prompt to install for the purpose, with more detailed information and a couple of other details that make it less unsafe. After a few years of that, consensus has grown that this seems to be working acceptably, and that the technique may be considered for other risky areas. They haven’t said anything about USB publicly, to my knowledge, which is definitely way more dangerous than MIDI (even SysEx), but I have heard one rumour (of dubious provenance) that they may cautiously proceed with USB and such too some time soon. Though this sort of thing definitely weighs against that, showing that maybe they were right the first time.
I kinda remember that the counterargument Google used is that only devices with a special attribute would ever be available through WebHID, ensuring that such older devices would never be exposed.
Cue my surprise when it turns out you can use WebHID to program a Minidisc / Net-MD device [1], so.. they never did implement that filter, apparently. I mean, certainly it is useful, but ... What The F., Google?
[1] https://web.minidisc.wiki/