Seeing a security advisory an issue like this for Chrome is frustrating and makes me seriously consider giving up Chrome. If there is a way to use Netflix on Linux without Chrome, I am all ears. I have begun to explore other browsers and options.

Some other browser I am currently exploring:

• Vivaldi
• Midori
• Surf

I couldn't tell if Surf had java script support by reading the project page though. Vivaldi looks promising, but crashes with bookmark/data imports. I may settle on Midori if Surf is too minimal.

It's not about being afraid it's about installing closed source software without user interaction.
What's the point of running open source software if the software "secretly" installs malware?
Some might like malware but i don't.

The hotwords extension is not malware. Why do you think that?
You are right that an extension should never be downloaded silently. Not even an extension that does have its source code available.

There is no security advisory, where did you see one? Writing these words into the topic's subject does not make it into one.

It's malware since the user didn't ask for it or allow it.
Some might classify it as grayware but for me it's all malware.

Might I suggest some online checking using Google about the actual definition of "malware"?
No offense to you Nille and neither directed at you, but why should I take people seriously who howl along with the pack without any display of independent thinking?

1 members found this post helpful.

You are right, and I have corrected my post. This whole thing doesn't sit well with me thats all. I like to know what is installed on my system and when files just appear that I am unaware of, I become concerned. Maybe I am just paranoid. If we were all running Windows, this kind of thing would be happening all the time.

Lets not make this an potayto, potahto an turn this into the definition of malware thread.
Secretly installing unwanted software without interaction or asking permission and without the option for the user to decline should always be classified as malware.
An later investigation might prove it not to be malware but it might still impose an security risk that also needs to be looked at.
I define all unwanted code as malware because it's not a normal behavior to install things secretly if i didn't ask it to do so.

1 members found this post helpful.

http://alien.slackbook.org/blog/pipe...#comment-23170

I've had excellent results with the above on Firefox for Linux running in Slackware64, with "User Agent Overrider 0.2.5.1" set to "windows running firefox 29." However, just last week Netflix changed their site and firefox 29 no longer works and I had to change it to "windows running IE11." Hopefully the author of the agent overrider will update the package.
You can also run windows in a VirtualBox and use that to watch NetFlix. Works quite well, actually.

KHTML or WebKit?

I've used it and liked it, initially, but it is a PITA to use, compared to SeaMonkey, Opera-12.16 and others.

If a browser is developed as open-source, then by all reasoning, any "extras" brought in, especially as binary blobs, should at least be kept external as either plugins, extensions, or add-ons that can be added either at execution runtime or compile time, not dropped in and just said to heck with it, and everything for the browser should be "open source".

And yes, this is about Chromium not Chrome. Chromium is touted to be an open source software package, not a mixed source. There are certain guidelines that must be followed when you have a source that is classified as open and free, regardless of license:

1 members found this post helpful.

I do not use either Chrome or Chromium, but had followed this thread because it was in the Slackware forum.

So, I just saw this article and returned here to see if it is the same thing or related.

From the article:

Is this the same things already being discussed here?

I think I'll keep my fiberglass reinforced tin foil hat...

Yes, indirectly it is, but yes. Google apparently installed audio capable backdoors onto user's machines without their consent or knowledge.

I'm already contacting my state Representative, Devin Nunes, about this, and anyone else, I suggest that you contact your legal authorities as well.

This was done deliberately and Google needs to answer for this, if at all possible by legal means. Corporations like Google shouldn't be allowed to do things like this and get away with it without consequences.

Pending any reply I get back I'll share it here, even if not favorable.

1 members found this post helpful.

Not sticking up for google and I don't agree with them installing stuff without me knowing but, google probably enabled the mics in chrome to enable voice capabilities, like using the "google now" command to start a search or action( like in android).


Old link

like http://www.theverge.com/apps/2014/3/...chrome-browser

Yes, but they should have made it optional and more importantly... known. You don't "ninja" things in that could be used to exploit a system or network somehow.

You ninja stuff into MMORPGs to add special secret cool content, not ninja in web browser plugins that are enabled by default and suddenly become mandatory.