• muirrum
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 years ago

    I’ve seen stuff about “loss prevention” but I’m inclined to believe that that’s BS.

    • AgreeableLandscape
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 years ago

      Loss of what? I don’t see how port scanning the user’s devices factors into that.

      • muirrum
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 years ago

        That was my thought line too. There’s no real need that I can see for this sort of thing.

        • AgreeableLandscape
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          5 years ago

          IMO, system-level features like port scanning should at least require a browser-generated permissions prompt like sensible browsers have for camera and microphone access, if not non-existent from the APIs available to websites.

          • muirrum
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 years ago

            I can’t think of a use-case where a third-party website would ever need to see what ports I have open on my machine.

            • AgreeableLandscape
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              5 years ago

              Exactly. Same with what extensions I have installed and most other information listed in the fingerprinting section of Panopticlick.

              It’s for browser/device fingerprinting and basically nothing else.