usb

> Reason they state for not adding support it is that user consent is not enough to access the device, which is just nonsense, There was a kinda major security issue [1] where malicious websites used WebUSB to access FIDO/U2F keys. This was bad because U2F credentials are supposed to be impossible to phish, as the browser's U2F API puts the domain name in the request to the token - but by using WebUSB, a site could request a token for any domain name. And as both U2F and WebUSB popped up quite similar looking user consent boxes, it's pretty much impossible to avoid some users getting confused. Google's solution, believe it or not, was to blocklist a load of devices for WebUSB [2] - so now anyone making U2F devices has to get Google to add every new product they release to the blocklist. Everyone loves the fact the browser is a secure sand

This is such a lame argument. You want it to be true but have no evidence that it actually is true. A lot of the Chrome team's "standards" have problems with accessibility, workability on mobile, security[0], privacy[1], or just battery life. Some are neat experiments that are or only will be used in the wild by advertisers to track and identify users. Because the Safari/WebKit team doesn't have to chase users for revenue like Mozilla does they can afford to be more conservative with what Google "standards" they support. Being able to offer a tighter privacy posture or efficiency is part of the iOS/macOS sales pitch. [0] https://github.com/WICG/webusb/issues/50 [1] https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/16/22387492/google-floc-ad-t...

Did you read this? https://wicg.github.io/webusb/#security-and-privacy Maybe give feedback here? https://github.com/WICG/webusb/issues/

WebUsb is pretty cool https://github.com/WICG/webusb