Jump to content

FYI - Google Chrome Plans To Block AV Module Process Injection


itman
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Most Valued Members
19 hours ago, itman said:

Interesting article that could cause issues for many security products. There is however talk on there about a whitelist which could make sense with the browser only blocking those that have issues

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both Google and Mozilla want AV vendors out of their browsers; both are on record for that. Doubt Google will allow AV software to be whitelisted.

Main issues are pertaining to Eset is the recently implemented browser script protection that uses a hook and more importantly, Online Banking/Payment Protection. Regarding OPP, Eset best to get busy developing their own locked down browser or just restrict its use to IE and Edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
3 hours ago, itman said:

Both Google and Mozilla want AV vendors out of their browsers; both are on record for that. Doubt Google will allow AV software to be whitelisted.

Main issues are pertaining to Eset is the recently implemented browser script protection that uses a hook and more importantly, Online Banking/Payment Protection. Regarding OPP, Eset best to get busy developing their own locked down browser or just restrict its use to IE and Edge.

Would they not have a legal problem with this? I mean people pay for security features that works with browsers and they won't be happy if they suddenly stop working. There's also the risk of either side losing customers e.g. if AV's build their own browser or a shared browser Google and others will lose out or some will be forced to avoid certain features if they need specific browsers e.g. I use chrome as I have an android phone and have my desktop and mobile browser synced

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members

Just another attempt by Google to be "all things to all people". One of the key names to try and paint a bad picture of traditional antivirus products for years now. They won the web search battle against Yahoo and Microsoft years ago and are in the process of carving up the android market for themselves by being the only company to offer regular updates for phones.

I cant see every security vendor sitting back and letting them steal their business. Plus all these 3rd party security companies all have apps listed on Google Play Store , so how can that possibly be workable ?? or do they plan to corner the mobile antivirus market at the same time.

My guess is that in 10 years time they will still be drip feeding the same "Reworded" news ........

I also doubt that AV's are willing to build their own browsers to accompany their products. But i suppose with a good offer of royalties or cash that Mozilla could be persuaded to part with their code to be used in commercial products.



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
3 minutes ago, cyberhash said:

to all people". One of the key names to try and paint a bad picture of traditional antivirus products for years now. They won the web search battle against Yahoo and Microsoft years ago and are in the process of carving up the android market for themselves by being the

Don't they own android?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
Just now, peteyt said:

Don't they own android?

Yes they do .... but what i meant by carving up the android market is that device/manufacurer specific versions of android is what they are trying to kill off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
1 minute ago, cyberhash said:

Yes they do .... but what i meant by carving up the android market is that device/manufacurer specific versions of android is what they are trying to kill off.

To be honest it's not too bad an idea. The good thing with Android at the moment is the phone's can have extra stuff on, something you don't get with Apple e.g. Samsung has TouchWiz and other stuff. But the issue is that a lot of phones don't get updated or it takes ages. It's tricky trying to get it in the middle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
2 minutes ago, peteyt said:

To be honest it's not too bad an idea. The good thing with Android at the moment is the phone's can have extra stuff on, something you don't get with Apple e.g. Samsung has TouchWiz and other stuff. But the issue is that a lot of phones don't get updated or it takes ages. It's tricky trying to get it in the middle.

I totally agree it's a mixed basket. I have a Motorola that is sitting on android 5.1 , and will probably never see another update before its time to resign it to the recycling and buy a new one.

For security i would love the latest update, but who is really to blame ??? do google only allow manufacturers to update devices to a certain build or is it decided by a timescale. Or do Motorola, Samsung etc not care ???

Pretty poor when you think that an expensive buy like a 2017 model smartphone could essentially be stuck with old apps and an old O/S if google corners it all for itself within months of purchase.

Competition is good for everyone, sadly when it comes to technology the choices are getting smaller as time goes on.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 months later...
  • Most Valued Members
On 19/05/2017 at 4:30 PM, itman said:

It seems this is going ahead https://blog.chromium.org/2017/11/reducing-chrome-crashes-caused-by-third.html 

Apparently third-party  applications that inject code into chrome are 15% more likely to cause crashes and there are modern more safer ways this can be achieved e.g. via Chrome extensions and Native Messaging. 

This is being introduced in three stages:

April 2018 - Chrome version 66 will start alerting users if a third-party application causes a crash with Chrome apparently  guiding the user to either update or remove the application

July 2018 - Chrome version 68 will begin blocking third-party applications from injecting into chrome processes. If this blocking prevents chrome from starting, Chrome will restart and allow the injection, but show a warning guiding the user to remove the application.

January  2019 - Chrome version 72 will remove the warnings and always block code injection.

Not sure if or how it will effect Eset? Not sure if @Marcos can answer this e.g. will work need done on the stuff that blocks scripts?

I should add that Microsoft-signed code, accessibility software, and IME software will not be affected by these changes

Edited by peteyt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
2 minutes ago, persian-boy said:

Does it apply to chromium forks? or only chrome?

Not really sure about that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The solution to this issue is easy - just don't use Chrome. If you were to tally up the browser with the most issues to date for Eset users, Chrome wins hands down.

The solution to Google's baloney is for people to stop using Chrome. They will get the message loud and clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Most Valued Members
1 hour ago, itman said:

The solution to this issue is easy - just don't use Chrome. If you were to tally up the browser with the most issues to date for Eset users, Chrome wins hands down.

The solution to Google's baloney is for people to stop using Chrome. They will get the message loud and clear.

A lot of people use it though. As i have an android phone using chrome is handy for its easy sync.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...