Morning,
This sounds reasonable. Returning unauthorized and 0 when the value is
unauthorized sounds good to me.
Should the methods perhaps be called getSystemIdleState() and
getSystemIdleTimeInSeconds()?
Thanks,
David.
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 11:48 PM, Michael Nordman micha...@google.comwrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:
* Jeremy Orlow wrote:
As far as I know, there really aren't any. This was discussed on WhatWG
(before being directed here) and IIRC there were no serious security or
privacy concerns. The minimum resolution of the
This particular proposal is clearly a good feature and Bjoern's is a good
articulation of privacy concerns.
Something lacking in the web platform in general (to my knowledge, albeit
limited) is a permissioning scheme whereby sites or applications can
establish rights. Is there any work being done
On Sep 17, 2009, at 23:13 , Jeremy Orlow wrote:
I think there is some merit to Jonas and Frederick's comments. We
are leaking more information (but not a lot more) about a users
habits than we did before. I haven't responded to them yet because
I don't have a good answer. :-)
I think
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:05:58 +0200, David Bennett d...@google.com wrote:
I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers to
access system idle information. Please give me feedback and suggestions
on the proposal.
What exactly are the security and privacy implications
Hi David,
On Sep 17, 2009, at 00:05 , David Bennett wrote:
I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers
to access system idle information. Please give me feedback and
suggestions on the proposal.
Thanks!
SUMMARY
There currently is no way to detect the system idle
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Arve Bersvendsen ar...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:05:58 +0200, David Bennett d...@google.com wrote:
I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers to
access system idle information. Please give me feedback and suggestions
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 12:50 AM, Arve Bersvendsen ar...@opera.com wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:05:58 +0200, David Bennett d...@google.com wrote:
I have a proposal for an extension to javascript to enable browsers to
isn't the mere knowledge of the level of activity on a device a
possible privacy concern, and couldn't the pattern of activity offer a
traffic analysis type opportunity?
regards, Frederick
Frederick Hirsch
Nokia
On Sep 17, 2009, at 1:35 PM, ext Jeremy Orlow wrote:
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009
I don't believe that's what Frederick is talking about. Also, fuzzing and
rounding don't apply to the proposal you just sent out since it's now just
an event (rather than a timer based API).
I think there is some merit to Jonas and Frederick's comments. We are
leaking more information (but not a
On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Jeremy Orlow jor...@chromium.org wrote:
I don't believe that's what Frederick is talking about. Also, fuzzing and
rounding don't apply to the proposal you just sent out since it's now just
an event (rather than a timer based API).
Well, there is still a
* Jeremy Orlow wrote:
As far as I know, there really aren't any. This was discussed on WhatWG
(before being directed here) and IIRC there were no serious security or
privacy concerns. The minimum resolution of the event makes attacks based
on keystroke timing impossible. Some people suggested
12 matches
Mail list logo
