From: Adam Barth mailto:aba...@webkit.org>>
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 00:34:42 -0800
To: Adobe Systems mailto:vha...@adobe.com>>
Cc: "webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org<mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>"
mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>>
Subject: Re: [webkit-dev]
On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 2:40 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
> On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:29 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
>>> @chris
>>>
> So I take back my statement that CSS Shaders are less dangerous than
> WebGL. They are more!!!
>>>
>>> It seems to
to:vha...@adobe.com>>
Cc: Adam Barth mailto:aba...@webkit.org>>,
"webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org<mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>"
mailto:webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org>>
Subject: Re: [webkit-dev] Timing attacks on CSS Shaders (was Re:Security
problems with CSS shaders)
On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:29 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
>> @chris
>>
So I take back my statement that CSS Shaders are less dangerous than
WebGL. They are more!!!
>>
>> It seems to me that the differences are:
>>
>> a. It is easier to do
On Dec 7, 2011, at 7:23 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> @chris
>
> >> So I take back my statement that CSS Shaders are less dangerous than
> >> WebGL. They are more!!!
>
> It seems to me that the differences are:
>
> a. It is easier to do the timing portion of a timing attack in WebGL
On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Vincent Hardy wrote:
> @chris
>
>>> So I take back my statement that CSS Shaders are less dangerous than
>>> WebGL. They are more!!!
>
> It seems to me that the differences are:
>
> a. It is easier to do the timing portion of a timing attack in WebGL because
> it al
Hello,
@chris
>> So I take back my statement that CSS Shaders are less dangerous than WebGL.
>> They are more!!!
It seems to me that the differences are:
a. It is easier to do the timing portion of a timing attack in WebGL because it
all happens in a script and the timing is precise. With CSS
7 matches
Mail list logo