←back to thread

428 points coronadisaster | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
jamesgeck0 ◴[] No.23679063[source]
> Web MIDI API - Allows websites to enumerate, manipulate and access MIDI devices.

This API is actually a bit horrifying from a security perspective. In addition to allowing you to use MIDI keyboards as input devices on websites, it also allows websites to send binary firmware updates to MIDI devices. The reason is that it's common to use custom firmware to backup/restore settings and enable neat effects and functionality on MIDI devices.

Mozilla's engineers have reasonably pointed out that an attacker utilizing Web MIDI could use MIDI devices as a stepping stone to launch an attack against the user's PC outside of the web sandbox. One such attack might be by reprogramming the device to appear as a standard USB computer keyboard and "typing" commands to the host.

At least one well known manufacturer has vouched for the technical safety of their musical instruments, noting that they're physically designed in such a way that the MIDI firmware can't alter USB firmware. But there's no way to know that every MIDI device has been similarly well designed.

As neat as Web MIDI is, I think Mozilla and Apple probably made the right security call here.

https://github.com/mozilla/standards-positions/issues/58

replies(11): >>23679155 #>>23679165 #>>23679283 #>>23679303 #>>23679633 #>>23680706 #>>23681158 #>>23681737 #>>23682770 #>>23683437 #>>23683855 #
cocoggu ◴[] No.23679283[source]
It's still possible to partially implement it while keeping it safe by excluding sysex messages. Probably more than 90% of the end users will never need sysex messages so why bother?
replies(1): >>23679431 #
jjtheblunt ◴[] No.23679431[source]
> so why bother?

maybe 10% is enticing for those who create botnets

replies(1): >>23681248 #
dkersten ◴[] No.23681248[source]
I’m pretty sure GP meant why bother implementing sysex messages.

Personally, I think that’s the solution. Provide access to the most common and safe features while disallowing the unsafe one. You’d still get far more functionality than you have now and only sacrifice a little in exchange for safety (vs not having any at all).

replies(1): >>23681709 #
1. jjtheblunt ◴[] No.23681709[source]
yeah it will be interesting to see how it evolves