Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
토론 규칙 및 지침
게시글 신고
Steam has published patch notes in the past stating they bumped their Chromium version to a particular public build number. Not just the major version. An exact public build number.
That doesn't particularly jive with heavily customizing Chromium.
I also highly doubt Valve has the know-how or resources to correctly integrate all the upstream bug-fixes and security updates from the 20+ major versions that were revved over the past years.
Let alone the fact that there have been many exhaustive and wide-reaching changes to the underlying components of the rendering pipeline; JavaScript engine; CSS selector engine; HTML and CSS parsers & pre-parsers; and others, that would preclude the ability to back-port such bug- fixes and security updates.
There are some signs they've put in the effort to back-port one or two things they've specifically needed for e.g. Linux and the Steam Deck. (In particular some things related to smooth scrolling, iirc.) But rather than an actual fix in their branch of CEF, that could equally just be a Chromium origin trial they've flipped from enabled into disabled state or vice-versa.
The Steam client uses quite a few of those. You can actually check Steam's logs/webhelper.txt log-file to see which. It lists them.
The current one launches with some ... interesting parameter choices.
Valve is explicitly disabling the SameSiteByDefaultCookies feature. Same-site marked cookies are a security feature that was introduced default-enabled in Chromium 85 to protect against cross-site request forgery (CRSF). https://chromestatus.com/feature/5088147346030592
Probably they need to disable that because of how they manage session cookies across the store front and community; with those two properties actually being hosted on two completely different root domains. (I mean; they could've actually fixed their own code - but just disabling it was probably easier for them, right?)
Valve are also still enabling the ResizeObserver experimental feature.
ResizeObserver is an API to efficiently detect when DOM elements resize.
That API was actually made standard available with Chromium 64. https://chromestatus.com/feature/5705346022637568
Humorously they are also still attempting to disable the Badging API.
That one shipped as stable with Chromium 81 and the experimental flag no longer exists. https://chromestatus.com/feature/6068482055602176
So, riddle me this:
If Valve is on-the-ball wrt merging in patches and keeping their own fork of Chromium up-to-date
... and if it's just the publicly attested version number that's sloppily out-of-date
... then why exactly do they still have to enable an experimental flag for a feature that -- even in the build number of Chromium they publicly attest to using -- had already reached stable general availability earlier? Twenty versions earlier.
And why are they attempting to disable an experimental feature that isn't even experimental anymore in the version they last publicly attested to using?
Yes mate - that actually is how software development works.
If you take a dependency that is at-risk to security issues, then you damn well ensure you keep it up-to-date. Failing to do so is how for example a well-known antivirus vendor had a problem some years back with their kernel mode components being exploited to achieve code execution, thanks to a decades-old unrar-dependency that still had a well-known buffer-overflow vulnerability.
If you take a dependency that has to be used in conjunction with third-parties that will have certain expectations of it being current, then you keep it up-to-date at well.
Valve not doing so is e.g. how we're currently stuck in the situation that certain payment providers no longer work if you attempt to purchase and pay from the Steam Client, rather than from an up-to-date browser.
That comparison is nonsense. The client's Chromium hasn't been changed that much from the original Chromium release to warrant a comparison with a current-day language vis-a-vis a dead one.
Does it work? yes, then don't touch it.
I would like to hear how slightly outdated chromium is affecting payment providers that wwork on steam
My point is that ENglish is based on Latin but a good chunk of it is basicallty cobbled together from other languages. Just like the the client is based on Chromium with a ton of extra custiomizations, attachments etc.
Win 7+, VS2017 15.7.1+, Win 10.0.19041 SDK, Ninja
macOS 10.10-10.15, 10.10+ deployment target, 10.14.4+ build system w/ 10.15.1 base SDK (Xcode 11.2), Ninja, 64-bit only
Ubuntu 16.04+, Debian Sid+, Ninja
Jul 2020 4183 85 85
Win 7+, VS2017 15.7.1+, Win 10.0.19041 SDK, Ninja
macOS 10.10-10.15, 10.10+ deployment target, 10.14.4+ build system w/ 10.15.1 base SDK (Xcode 11.2), Ninja, 64-bit only
Ubuntu 14.04+, Debian Jessie+, Ninja
SteamOS 2.0 brewmaster Debian 8 (Jessie)
if someone wonders why CEF85 is used.
happy discussing.
Normally I'm all for this, if it ain't broke don't try to fix it.
But steam is broken, and it doesn't work properly. There's a bunch of UI bugs, chat and friendslist are entirely unreliable these days, more issues than I'll even bother listing here, but..
It's broken. Needs fixing.
Outdated browser versions is also just plain bad practice. Valve left a big fat CVE hanging for over a year with outdated chromium that allowed full system takeover via. Dota. Like, actually hijacking the OS level vulnerability. There was no good reason/excuse for that.
It's borked, tons of people are having all sorts of issues. Updating wouldn't add significant difficulties because there's already a bunch of stuff that needs fixing.
As was posted before:
In some jurisdictions this isn't even an issue of what Valve deems beneficial, but an issue of them being legally required to ensure security updates are followed through on and delivered in a timely fashion.
Wouldn't at all be surprised if this turns out to be the reason.
Which would be inexcusable.
It's not so much the fact that Steam could use its own user-mode libraries; it's that there needs to be a compatible build script and potential alternate branches in source code that's capable of producing a library that will actually work for the target environment, given all its constraints - down to the kernel. CEF and Chromium are complicated beasts to build from source, which pull in a lot of dependencies; rely on a lot of intricacies; and tend to make use of every optimization offered by e.g. newly released kernels, that they can, and they don't have any grievances over dropping support for old distributions that are out-of-support.
Debian 'Jessie' is Debian 8, which came out back in 2015 on kernel 3.16 - but current CEF releases list Debian 10+ aka Debian 'Buster' as a minimum requirement, on kernel 4.
Actually, both are already out of support - both regular and long-term, since 2020. Debian 11 'Bullseye' is what you should be on, if you're using Debian. Chromium probably would have no issues cutting Debian 10 support loose either, by now - if they figure they really need something from the version 5 series of kernel and don't want to invest in any band-aiding or special-casing for older kernels.
(Note that although it is out of LTS, Jessie is one of the current two paid-for extended long-term support versions available. Until 2025 in Jessie's case. Hopefully, Valve is making use of that at least.)