
ServiceWorker's Link leads to botnet-like persistent JavaScript worker - omphalos
https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=662443
======
lvs
You can see what service workers are registered here:

chrome://serviceworker-internals/

Frankly, I'm tempted to label the whole notion of a remote-installing auto-
updating local proxy as a misguided antifeature, but I honestly don't know
enough about it. What was wrong with app caching?

~~~
SimeVidas
You mean AppCache?

~~~
lvs
Sort of. I meant caching apps, of which AppCache is an implementation.

~~~
patates
It's not dynamic and doesn't even allow wildcards. So, you have to use hashes
given that opening /details?id=123 won't be served from the cache even if you
have everything on the client side to construct that page. Most people just
cache /details and navigate to /details#id=123. I think if appcache was made a
little more developer friendly, the need for service workers would seriously
be reduced.

------
nsamuell
Hm. This seems difficult to prevent without really preventing a lot of valid
use cases.

------
homakov
See [https://truefactor.io/catworker](https://truefactor.io/catworker) for
botnet admin page

------
noxn
Wheres the source for this?

