Yes, you can fingerprint the existence of the API itself, but that applies to all APIs. Also the APIs that Safari does support.
API support is not a way to fingerprint users. At most you can fingerprint browser version. But... you already have the user agent string for that.
1
1
7
Mozilla has elaborated a bit on this in their stance on Web USB: mozilla.github.io/standards-…
They also have comments on Web Bluetooth there, but no comments in regards to any fingerprinting vulnerability: mozilla.github.io/standards-…
/cc @firt
1
3
Yeah. The arguments seems to be that if the user is tricked into connecting to a device, the data from that device can be used for fingerprinting... Which in itself might be true.
But that is setting the bar pretty high.
2
1
When you trick the user, you can also get their geolocation. Or access the files on their file system. Analyse the footage of their webcam. Or background audio.
1
1
Combined with the part of Mozilla's argument where they say that USB and Bluetooth in themselves were never really designed to act in a "secure" way in a scenario like this, one can imagine scenarios where innocent looking USB-devices could have a hidden identity purposes?
2
With that in mind you should disable Apple Pay also because businesses can scam you, which is something that happens every minute over credit cards and payment systems . It's a weird argument.
1
I guess eg @davidbaron and @annevk would be better at explaining the stance than me trying to interpret any deeper meaning into the Mozilla position.
I find the position interesting and I can see the point of view, though I'm ultimately undecided myself, would have to dig deeper
2
1
At the end I think this is a matter of user choice. I agree a browser can warn the user and let her disable features. But deciding for the user with no other option ends in a dictatorship. That's not applying to Mozilla or even WebKit by itself. It applies to iOS and iPadOS
2
1
So when the browser warns the user, what do we say to a user who doesn't know what USB is beyond "a cable"? Is it OK for a webpage to send firmware updates or security exploits to a USB device that change what type of device it is (say, from storage to keyboard) or brick it?
3
1
input type=file is good permission handling -- the user is clearly choosing to give a *particular* file to the site. Yes, they might not understand all of the implications.
Would you consider a USB permission grant enough to give the site access to *any* file on the disk?
Jun 29, 2020 · 6:10 PM UTC
1



