Jump to content

Google refuses to fix Remote Code Execution Vulnerabilities in Chromium 59. Unpatched Electron & CEF Apps are Vulnerable!

AlTech
10 hours ago, Sypran said:

Soooo rather then have apps update to Chromium 60 (Now Chromium 61) that already exists, Google should make a 59.5?
I fail to see the point... Chromium 60 was the patch. Cause if I recall Chromium version numbers never meant major updates anyways. I mean isn't that why we are on Chromium 61 even though its only 9 years old?

They are major enough to be a significant hassle to upgrade every time a new version comes out. Not to mention they need to keep backwards compatibility and newer Chromium versions may have new APIs or may deprecate old APIs.

10 hours ago, Sypran said:

And if the point is that these apps update every 2 versions of Chromium because 'reasons' (which seems like a fairly arbitrary update schedule) wouldn't they skip "59.5" and go right to 60? - Or shouldn't they be updating to Chromium 61 by now?

No.  Electron and CEF would patch 59 and then wait a bit before moving to 61.

They don't update right away since that can lead to instability and issues. They update when it's been verified it works with their setup.

Judge a product on its own merits AND the company that made it.

How to setup MSI Afterburner OSD | How to make your AMD Radeon GPU more efficient with Radeon Chill | (Probably) Why LMG Merch shipping to the EU is expensive

Oneplus 6 (Early 2023 to present) | HP Envy 15" x360 R7 5700U (Mid 2021 to present) | Steam Deck (Late 2022 to present)

 

Mid 2023 AlTech Desktop Refresh - AMD R7 5800X (Mid 2023), XFX Radeon RX 6700XT MBA (Mid 2021), MSI X370 Gaming Pro Carbon (Early 2018), 32GB DDR4-3200 (16GB x2) (Mid 2022

Noctua NH-D15 (Early 2021), Corsair MP510 1.92TB NVMe SSD (Mid 2020), beQuiet Pure Wings 2 140mm x2 & 120mm x1 (Mid 2023),

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, LAwLz said:

How is Chrome not good? It's fast, has great support for web standards, has a decent amount of features...

Interestingly enough, I recall conversations on the Opera forums back in the day (when they were still on Presto engine) about how Chrome required developers to code for the quirks of the browser, and not for web standards.  It was a major point of contention at that time, due to a lack of web developer support for Opera browser (which was practically religious about supporting WC3 standards to a 'T').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Interestingly enough, I recall conversations on the Opera forums back in the day (when they were still on Presto engine) about how Chrome required developers to code for the quirks of the browser, and not for web standards.  It was a major point of contention at that time, due to a lack of web developer support for Opera browser (which was practically religious about supporting WC3 standards to a 'T').

I'm still bumping into quirks with chrome, even IE does sometimes a better job...

I'm running the firefox quantum beta right now, really happy that's a thing, imo a good enough alternative :P

If you want my attention, quote meh! D: or just stick an @samcool55 in your post :3

Spying on everyone to fight against terrorism is like shooting a mosquito with a cannon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Interestingly enough, I recall conversations on the Opera forums back in the day (when they were still on Presto engine) about how Chrome required developers to code for the quirks of the browser, and not for web standards.  It was a major point of contention at that time, due to a lack of web developer support for Opera browser (which was practically religious about supporting WC3 standards to a 'T').

Well... When it comes to Opera and standards some will say they followed them and some will say they didn't. At the end of the day, Presto rendered a ton of web pages incorrectly. 

But for supporting web standards Chrome is king these days. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Well... When it comes to Opera and standards some will say they followed them and some will say they didn't. At the end of the day, Presto rendered a ton of web pages incorrectly.

Which ultimately boils down to developers coding their site for IE or Chrome, rather than for standards.  Opera actually kept an updated compatibility list explicitly to fix what some websites broke.  There was also a trend of some developers blocking functionality if the browser didn't respond as IE.

 

Opera even had a full on masking technique that reported the browser as IE or Firefox.  It's amazing how sometimes a site would be completely broken, and just tricking the page into thinking you were running IE would magically make it all work.  Believe me, I used Opera for many years.  I'm quite aware of all the tricks required to make it work for some websites.  And then I could bring up the infamous MSN.com incident, where they explicitly wrote the site to render all text illegible if the browser reported Opera (not even joking, it was a complete mess).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody knows what is he issue? How serious is it? Any pointer to the check ins from GitHub or chromium? Is it an issue if the only remote sever I connect to is manges by my team?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×