This that and the article are very light on details, but I couldn’t find an article deeper in details
My laptop, that I own and runs Linux that I installed, has chrome in it. I’m order to log into Gmail for work, it installs an extension that is capable of telling Gmail if my disk is encrypted. I know because you get an error message until my disk was actually encrypted. It was a big surprise to me, and I wonder if this is done by the same piece of code.
Btw would there be a way to do virtualization through perhaps docker or flat pack or chroot that can isolate chrome in a sandbox and prevent it from a) reading and writing files anywhere on any disk and b) get other data such as CPU, disk encryption etc?
My laptop, that I own and runs Linux that I installed, has chrome in it. I’m order to log into Gmail for work, it installs an extension that is capable of telling Gmail if my disk is encrypted. I know because you get an error message until my disk was actually encrypted. It was a big surprise to me, and I wonder if this is done by the same piece of code.
That’s strange, I’ve never heard of that before
Btw would there be a way to do virtualization through perhaps docker or flat pack or chroot that can isolate chrome in a sandbox and prevent it from a) reading and writing files anywhere on any disk and b) get other data such as CPU, disk encryption etc?
There are some isolation mechanisms on Linux like Firejail or Bubblewrap. The latter is used by Flatpak to sandbox applications. These are rather weak though, and Flatpak weakens the security of bwrap further. By default, Flatpak application permissions are also set in a Manifest file, which is created by the maintainer of the package. To get more control over your Flatpak sandbox, you need to use an application like Flatseal.
Docker (or containers in general) aren’t meant for isolation/sandboxing, but this approach would also work. I would create a container using Distrobox or toolbx, and install Chrome inside the container.
This will not prevent Chrome from getting your CPU information though. To protect against that, you would have to use a virtual machine (and spoof the your CPU model if you want to hide that from Chrome).
OP apparently needs Chrome to log into an enterprise GSuite account, which has specific requirements, that are enforced by Chrome’s enterprise policy system. I don’t think this works in Chromium.
Or anything Google for that matter. I see a lot of praise on Lemmy for their Pixel phones, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they eventually find there was a backdoor in their firmware all this time. Yes of course, I can not prove that right now, but this news about Google Chrome isn’t news for no reason. Don’t trust anything Google if you care about privacy, it is literally their business model (selling targeted ads).
Framework doesn’t have free boot firmware either and it contains the Intel ME (the backdoor in Intel CPU’s). The point I am trying to make is that you won’t find a perfect solution anywhere.
You’re right, but I never said perfect. Perfect doesn’t exist. I’m looking for reasonable and sustainable. Projects like framework and libreboot are making this possible for the first time in history. But, like you eluded to, they, too, won’t be perfect.
People don’t hate Google as much as they should. It’s cringeworthy how much they promote this ad company on this platform. They don’t even realze themselves they got comprised.
I fucking hate Google and wouldn’t use any of their (proprietary) software, but Pixel phones are amazing. Hear me out, Google is the only phone manufacturer right now, that puts extensive hardware security features like MTE, a secure element, as well as a bunch of others in their phones. The Google Titan M2 is based on an open-source project called OpenTitan, and Google has even contributed their own changes upstream. It’s based on the open RISC-V architecture, and it’s the most complete and secure implementation of a secure element that you can find in an Android phone. The only thing that comes even close is the “Secure Enclave” in Apple ARM chips, that are used in modern iPhones, iPads and Macs. I understand the concern about a potential backdoor in the firmware, but that’s a valid concern with basically every CPU on the market right now. x86 are ARM are completely proprietary, so you can’t really trust any CPU based on one of these architectures. The old Google Titan M1 was based on ARM, Apple’s Secure Enclave is also based on ARM, as well as Snapdragon’s SPU (which is incomplete and insecure anyway). The Titan M2, being based on open hardware architecture and firmware, is the most trustworthy secure element, despite being made by Google. It includes features like Insider Attack Resistance, support for the Weaver API, Android StrongBox hardware keystore implementation and is used for a secure implementation of Android Verified Boot. GrapheneOS is free, open-source, and doesn’t use any proprietary Google apps/services by default. Although I hate Google, a Pixel with GrapheneOS is currently the best option for a secure smartphone.
Does this also affect Chromium, or is it just Google Chrome?
The article mentions it being affecting Google Chrome through Chromium, but it’s not clear if it also affects Chromium on its own, or other Chromium-based browsers.
Chromium alone depends on if it’s the Google version or the Un-Googled version. For the Google version of Chromium, it still has that hangouts extension. However, the Un-Googled Chromium has that extension removed via the build flags, the one to note is enable_hangout_services_extension=false.
As others have said though, it can also depend on what other Chromium-based is being used. Some browsers like Brave and including Vivaldi can have this turned off in the settings. Others like Edge and Opera are affected as well. However it doesn’t affect every Chromium-based browser.
I’ll admit, in several places I used Edge as an effort to have at least some layer of distrust between myself and Google. I’ll have to quit that though.
It’s not elegant, but it supports the workflow you suggest. I kind of like the idea of using Edge for google.com and Chrome for microsoft.com. I’m not optimizing my experience (it may in fact be very sub-optimal), but I’m also using competition to neutralize potential shenanigans.
such a sensationalist article there. mozilla isnt an advertising company, they bought a company that specialises in privacy focused ad campaigns so they can provide an alternative to google for companies.
I am “slightly” worried that there’s only a single option left. That’s only 1 organization’s corruption removed from total loss of control over browsing privacy :/
Google pays them to be the default search. FF is like Steve Irwin, you could have been the biggest poacher, if you gave him money he would use it to buy land to help protect animals. FF is pulling the same thing but for the intetnet
I already ditched Windows for Linux a month ago because of spyware. Everything Google-related is next. My phone is going to be the hardest thing to de-infest.
Pff, sure buddy. Used it for 4 months due to my phone being dead. Go shill someone else. If the adoption of a new os goes against what I want of said os, then it’s not an os for me. Simple as that
Searching for “Calyx” got me a lot of results that had nothing to do with the Android ROM, so for the convenience of anyone else reading this thread their URL is calyxos.org
I’m also doing this. Proton is amazing, for the most part. Ente Photos is also incredible for ditching Google Photos, although I’ll probably switch to Proton Photos when that comes out since Ente is pricey.
It is, but I’d barely consider it a launch of anything. It displays photos, but that’s it. I could already upload and view photos on Proton Drive before they “launched” this.
Honestly I just keep my phone as my designated privacy nightmare so I can get free phone calls on wifi and keep in touch with family members who are still on facebook.
I already ditched Windows for Linux a month ago because of spyware.
Great!
Everything Google-related is next.
Even better.
My phone is going to be the hardest thing to de-infest.
If you plan on getting a new phone soon, I recommend a Google Pixel, on which you can install GrapheneOS. Yes, ironically Google devices are the best for installing alternative operating systems and removing all the Google BS. GrapheneOS is completely free and open source, and based on the Android Open Source Project. It incorporates many privacy and security enhancements, and gives you total freedom and control over your device. In my opinion, it’s the best option for degoogling a phone.
Android is a very secure system, but that comes with some compromises such as customizability and development features. Both of which are important to the Lineage OS project. Also running Lineage OS is not any more insecure then running a Linux or Windows desktop without secure boot, which many people do without issue
there’s a portion of the internet that just doesn’t work in Firefox because the company pays only $2 million a year for developers and they can’t do it
I mean web developers not the Firefox developers stop down voting me
I use Firefox and Linux and I don’t drive a car how about that
I think our company does something similar (Chrome by default, need to ask IT for anything else), but our department just said, “we need Macs to do our work, you have no power here…” I hate macOS, but I hate stupid IT policies more.
My biggest issue is video streaming on older computers. I have an old laptop I use casually for video playing in the background, and Webkit browsers like Edge definitely load YouTube with far less stuttering. I’m still trying to find good alternatives - lately even changing the user agent doesn’t seem to make it faster.
I had to look up what the Pomeranian dog breed is, because I’m not good with dog breeds. Soon as the page of images loaded I burst out laughing. 😆 Thank you. Good start to my day.
There’s a bunch of stuff in Chrome that’s special-cased to only allow Google to access it.
Not sure if it’s still there, but many years ago I was trying to figure out how to do something that some Google webapp was doing (can’t remember which one). I think it was something to do with popping up a chromeless window - that is, a new window with no address bar or browser chrome, just some HTML content.
Turns out the Chromium codebase had a hard-coded allowlist that only allowed *.google.com to use the API!
Edit: my memory was a bit wrong. It was this: stackoverflow.com/a/11614605. The Hangouts extension was allowlisted to use the functionality, but if any other extension wanted to use it, the user had to enable an experimental setting.
Are you talking about the “apps” that Chrome used to support? They removed the feature years ago to reduce bloat and RAM usage or something like that.
Before they removed the feature, I had actually figured out how to create my own “apps” that’d simply load webpages I visited often at the time, like Twitch.
I found what I was talking about: stackoverflow.com/a/11614605. It was a feature that the Hangouts extension could use, but the user had to manually enable it in the browser settings for any other extensions to use it.
The apps feature is still there just with a different name. It’s labeled as “create shortcut”, and you have to check the box to open a new window. I use it just because Firefox doesn’t have a similar feature.
Of course there’s some legitimate use case to it. Just like every privacy rights undermining bill helps “the children”. Doesn’t mean that’s the only or even the main goal.
fedi.simonwillison.net
Hot