Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Just saw your applicable blog post --
http://restforchrome.blogspot.com/2013/02/google-drive-permissions-why-app-need.
html
As I mentioned, I understand wanting to provide a folder picker for UX, but
from my perspective I'd rather set the default folder once and not have to
choose the same folder over and over. Since your app already organizes things
into projects, I'm even less likely to need multiple G-drive folders. If
available permissions let your app create the folder, great, but I still think
it would be better even if you ask users to type in the name of the folder
they've created.
Original comment by jeremys....@gmail.com
on 7 Jun 2013 at 8:51
Good point. Thanks for your valuable input.
As for a data access. Yes, the app can read metadata. It include file
description (I think you mean this as a indexable text), document's thumbnails
and probably location (are you referring to images location? I can't find any
reference to this point).
However I'm still not convinced. Let me describe my POV.
You said that the app should create some default folder and there it should
keep all files. But regarding a user experience it is a mistake. When You save
your file, you should know where the file is. If the app create a folder for
itself it is not obvious to the user where the file was stored. Of course I can
show the user a dialog "Your file is saved in XXX folder" but still it is not
good experience. Maybe someone wanted to save it under any other folder (for
example project's folder).
So. Now we are dealing with security vs convenience. I think that in this fight
convenience is winning. For me it is a simple list of the pros and cons. Value
of giving you flexibility is grater than not in order keep the app more secure.
Especially when we are not talking about very important data like document's
thumbnail (it is impossible to read any content from such thumbnail) or
description. And the project itself is open source and at any time you can
check source code. Or event extension's source code (part of the code
responsible for Google Drive integration is not minified so it is readable).
Taking this into consideration I prefer not to change scope of the permissions.
If you're not convinced or your company's security policy do not allow use a
tools with such permissions you can checkout a working copy of the project and
alter behavior regarding saving/opening files on Google Drive.
P.S.
I need to re-design opening/saving files on/to Google Drive because not it is
not always working. Maybe the output will be changing the permission's scope
but I can't tell this now for sure.
Original comment by jarro...@gmail.com
on 8 Jun 2013 at 1:36
Thank you for giving my suggestion your consideration.
I'm not sure if you saw my second reply, so just for the sake of discussion
I'll reply to your points and leave it up to you -- not trying to argue.
0. You've released the source code, and as you point out the extension is
inspectable, so the security isn't really so much a concern (which is why I
tagged this low priority). For me it's more the principle -- it feels wrong
when apps "ask for too much". But you never know if something else combined
with this app creates a security hole, that stuff is beyond me, so I feel like
it's better to play it safe.
1. Metadata -- from these two links (https://developers.google.com/drive/file)
and
(http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12093934/google-drive-add-meta-data-to-file)
the implication is that "indexable text" (which is different than the
description) is automatically scanned content from the document itself, and
assuming this is available as metadata it potentially means this permission
would allow you to see at least some document content, hence my concern.
Additionally, location data + image thumbnail could be revealing -- just to
illustrate my point, I've seen cases when people have uploaded cropped
headshots to image sharing sites that included a thumbnail version of the
original image in the EXIF metadata, which turned out to reveal nudity they
never intended to share (google "exif metadata thumbnail nudity" - couple
examples linked from this site http://www.rlvision.com/exif/).
2. Regarding user experience (and this is just my opinion) needing to
constantly browse for the same folder is less convenient than having the app
save to the same place every time (which is technically a different request).
But, are your saved files intended to be opened with anything other than your
app? If not, why would they need to be saved to a different location, as users
would never need to find it outside of your app? And finding things in the
easily searchable Drive isn't really that hard even if you hid things 20
folders deep.
Again, I appreciate your consideration. Maybe you'll change your mind later,
but if not, still a great app.
Also, good point about forking a copy, I might just to learn more about app
design.
Original comment by jeremys....@gmail.com
on 8 Jun 2013 at 3:00
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
jeremys....@gmail.com
on 7 Jun 2013 at 8:42