On Tuesday, July 30, 2013 10:18:42 PM UTC+2, Jonas Sicking wrote:
> I don't think that we should follow what chrome is doing. Chrome and
> 
> Android relies on that users make a lot of security decisions up front at
> 
> installation time. This is bad for security as users have very little
> 
> context to make a decision on.
> 
> 
> 
> It also means that users have only one recourse if they don't want to grant
> 
> a permission: don't install the application.
> 
> 
> 
> It also means that chrome can't do silent updates since updates can mean
> 
> that users need to make a security decision.
> 
> 
> 
> Instead we should follow the model that all our other APIs are using.
> 
> 
> 
> I.e. have a modal dialog at runtime where the user can choose to grant or
> 
> deny, and where they can choose to do so temporarily or permanently.
> 
> 
> 
> This dialog should be rendered by the system (rather than by an individual
> 
> app) and should write data into the nsIPermissionManager once the user
> 
> makes a decision.
> 
> 
> 
> / Jonas
> 
> On Jul 10, 2013 2:31 PM, <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > We are creating a cross-browser framework for packaged apps (
> 
> > http://github.com/urbien/urbini ) and can provide info on how Chrome does
> 
> > it, in my opinion much better, without any UX, matching from user's
> 
> > perspective how native apps do it.
> 
> >
> 
> > 1. Packaged app in Chrome can request a videoCapture and audioCapture
> 
> > permissions in manifest. So the user does not need to allow access to mic
> 
> > and camera every time. Imagine if Skype would do it like this. Would annoy
> 
> > the hell out of users. It is understandable why website accessing camera
> 
> > needs to ask user permission, but even a hosted app, not to mention a
> 
> > packaged app, should not need to harass the user.
> 
> >
> 
> > 2. getUserMedia() in iframe. Chrome as of v29 has a new mechanism, they
> 
> > allow packaged app to listen to "permissionrequest" event.
> 
> > webview.addEventListener("permissionrequest", function (e) {
> 
> >   // call e.request.allow() or e.request.deny()
> 
> > })
> 
> > (they use webview tag instead of iframe tag in packaged apps, but this is
> 
> > not relevant now)
> 
> > So, providing the packaged app requested permission from the user via a
> 
> > manifest, the code in iframe can request same permission from packaged app.
> 
> >
> 
> > We used both methods in apps built on Urbini framework in Chrome and they
> 
> > work fine. But now in FF OS and FF packaged app for Android we got stuck.
> 
> > Let me know if you need more info.
> 
> >
> 
> > On Friday, April 26, 2013 11:56:34 PM UTC-4, Paul Theriault wrote:
> 
> > > In bug 853356, there is some discussion around the permission granting
> 
> > mechanism to allow content to ask for microphone access via getUserMedia.
> 
> > The current plan is to use a prompt & permission combination similar to the
> 
> > way geolocation is handled. To me this API is much more sensitive than
> 
> > geolocation, and needs stronger mitigation.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Some thoughts for discussion:
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > 1. Current FirefoxOS prompts can not be ignored
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Prompts on b2g are modal and can not be ignored - the user must choose
> 
> > one way or another. Compare this to the door hanger approach for
> 
> > getUserMedia on desktop: if the user simply ignores the prompt it goes
> 
> > away. I would like to see  "safe if ignored" style of permission request on
> 
> > FirefoxOS for this use case if possible to prevent the user accidentally
> 
> > making the wrong choice.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > 2. Current permission indicators are not strong, or always present
> 
> > >
> 
> > > For untrusted content, there needs to be some trusted indicator that the
> 
> > camera/microphone is enabled. At the moment we have small icons in the
> 
> > taskbar for some permissions but in this case I think we need something
> 
> > more obvious like a red bar or something that is present for the duration
> 
> > of recording. (something similar to the call background indicator perhaps)
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > 3. The user needs a way to turn off video/audio
> 
> > >
> 
> > > The user needs a trusted way to know that video/audio is disabled. The
> 
> > permission is revoked when the window (app) is closed, but how does the
> 
> > user know which app is using the camera/mic? Obvious idea would be that
> 
> > tapping the recording indicator takes you to the app which is using the
> 
> > permission, so you can turn it off in the app, or close the app.
> 
> > >
> 
> > > However I also worry that the UI to close an app isnt very discoverable
> 
> > (long press on home, swipe up on app thumbnail). So maybe we need something
> 
> > more explicit here (perhaps combined with the notification from 2.)
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Finally, I imagine that we might provide less intrusive UI for
> 
> > privileged  or certified apps, but exactly what depends on the UI for web
> 
> > content, and the privileged/certified use cases.
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > >
> 
> > > Thoughts/comments/suggestions etc?
> 
> >
> 
> > _______________________________________________
> 
> > dev-b2g mailing list
> 
> > [email protected]
> 
> > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g
> 
> >

+1
_______________________________________________
dev-b2g mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-b2g

Reply via email to