Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:I'd love to trash Edge, but... (Score 1) 109

I found the setting for this: chrome://password-manager/settings has a "Use Windows Hello when filling passwords". It was off for me - I can only assume that is the default, as I have several Chrome profiles over several PCs and it's off in all of them.

Also noticed there's this:

Set up on-device encryption
For added safety, you can encrypt passwords on your device before they're saved to your Google Account

which, if I click on, takes me to a page that just says "On-device encryption canâ(TM)t be used for this account. Sign in to another Google Account and try again."

Comment Re:I'd love to trash Edge, but... (Score 2) 109

Chrome does require authentication for every password retrieval. It uses Windows Hello as well so in theory you don't even have a password to intercept since something like facial recognition authentication via a FIDO2 handshake is what ultimately allows Chrome to fill a single password on a single site.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean by 'auth' here, but on my PCs (Windows 10):

It does require auth for passkeys, I think every time, but not for regular saved passwords in the browser. I have Windows Hello set up for a couple passkeys and I have to auth via Hello when I use them.

But I have regular saved passwords for almost every other website I use routinely and am not prompted to auth via Hello for that. My understanding is that for these, the auth/unlock is done once at user login and then the session has access to the unencrypted passwords.

(I posted elsewhere in this thread about Chrome using DPAPI as of 2024 - this was news to me so it's possible I'm just way out of date).

Comment Re:I'd love to trash Edge, but... (Score 2) 109

Been trying to figure out how Chrome does this because my recollection was that Chrome had the exact same problem - I remember making a similar point to you in forum threads a couple years back with people complaining about it then.

It looks like in 2024, Chrome added support for something called the Data Protection API (DPAPI), which provides some mitigation against arbitrary memory reads:

App-Bound Encryption relies on a privileged service to verify the identity of the requesting application. During encryption, the App-Bound Encryption service encodes the app's identity into the encrypted data, and then verifies this is valid when decryption is attempted. If another app on the system tries to decrypt the same data, it will fail.

Because the App-Bound service is running with system privileges, attackers need to do more than just coax a user into running a malicious app. Now, the malware has to gain system privileges, or inject code into Chrome, something that legitimate software shouldn't be doing. This makes their actions more suspicious to antivirus software â" and more likely to be detected

It's not clear from my quick read if this defends against this class of "attack" in all cases but it reads like it might provide at least some protection?

If that is the case, it of course raises the question why Microsoft - who created DPAPI in the first place - wouldn't use that same service in the same way. (i.e. maybe it just sucks and they know it's a waste of time :)

Comment Re:Copyright issue? (Score 1) 88

Posting a commit message is not a legally binding authoring attribution and doesn't magically change things.

It's just like if I published a git tutorial site that had "coauthor: my_actual_name_here" hidden in an automation file. That would not magically give me copyright of every piece of code submitted by anyone who followed my git tutorial.

Comment PC industry shat the bed with Chromebooks (Score 1) 226

This is a shock to clueless CEOs who have never spoken to anyone forced to buy Chromebooks outside of enterprise agreements where nothing matters to either side except the number of zeroes on the invoice.

Our small business has had about 30 people on Chromebooks for about five years now. These have, generally, been great - most of them cost less than AUD$700, though they've gotten more expensive.

We've been buying Intel i5 CPUs with 8GB of RAM. These run most stuff with no problems.

But in true PC style, what the manufacturers have done is make a billion different models with different specs such that there is actually a dramatic difference in performance between them. You can buy something with an AMD CPU with 4GB of RAM and it's a piece of shit - but you won't know until you get it home and try it, because you just bought "a Chromebook".

We started buying i7/16GB models from Dell - these ones fly and are great. But then they simply stopped selling them. For two years they couldn't tell me what their Chromebook strategy was, because they only care about schools.

I think Apple will clean up here by making it simple - there are a small handful of models that are easily differentiable. They're Apple branded so they will be immediately more coveted than a random Chromebook thing.

I'll be buying some of these to replace our aging Chromebooks for sure. Keen to see how they go.

It's a shame because the i7/16GB Chromebooks are awesome to use.

Comment Re:This kind of stuff is the future (Score 1) 37

The advantage of at-scale lithium is the technology advances will trickle down to home users. I have a 30kWh home battery that was about $6k installed and retrofitted (AC coupled, ick I know) into my 12 kW solar system. This is battery slimline and about the size of two suitcases (it's two 15kWh stacks linked together). It charges in full by 12 noon on sunny days (with me then actively sending power back to the grid) and usually by end of day on overcast days.

If it was cheaper, but:
- required 2x as much charging (meaning i would rarely fill it, or needed double the solar)
- was several times as large

I would likely not consider it.

Any tech making home batteries cheaper/longer lifespan/denser is a win for people like me.

Slashdot Top Deals

In specifications, Murphy's Law supersedes Ohm's.

Working...