Chrome, Edge Extension V18?

[ChrisKoll]

Did I miss something or was this discontinued on v18? got a lot of clients using the extension for click to call

 

[Evolute IT]

a Windows OS app? I would believe that is a step backwards . Generally with our customers.. most of the staff runs on windows/mac, the techier staff runs on Ubuntu or Mint, and all the decision takers run IOs and Mac OS. So if the "new 3cx project" does not work perfectly with the IT staff and the decision takers hardware, it is out the window.

I really hope they stick to web based only and cross OS compatibility. It is easiest for 3CX to maintain too.

The webclient still exists... the new app is just the webclient contained in an Electron app that gives more possibilities than a Chrome extension.

Also, a Mac version is coming. I don't expect Linux tho.

 

[AGidi]

The webclient still exists... the new app is just the webclient contained in an Electron app that gives more possibilities than a Chrome extension.

Also, a Mac version is coming. I don't expect Linux tho.

That's my fear exactly. no Linux version, the Mac/iOs Version is two blocks behind the parade, cross compatibility is a must nowadays .

 

[jix]

The Chrome Browser extension ony works on current version of v18, if you have install it before v18rc2 and the new 3CX Windows Desktop App is useless….

 

[NickD_3CX]

Just an update about click2call here, we are preparing a Chrome Extension that will do this so eventually there will be no need for anything from 3rd parties.

We are considering releasing this as an update to the existing Extension so that even that users that have it will automatically get the update.

 

[ybello]

Thanks for the update @NickD_3CX please keep us posted on when the extension update is released (very soon i hope?) Its a must have for quite a number of our clients especially as it relates with cross platform compatibility. Infact for many it was a selling point for 3cx, having it thrown out of the window was heart breaking.

 

[Christian_B]

Wow, you abandoned the almost perfect cross-platform browser extension that was compatible with most if not all chromium based browser and missing only some minor cleanups by some dreck that is installed into the user profile of each Windows user? Have your developers ever heard of Software Restriction Policies (SRP)?

 

[Evolute IT]

Wow, you abandoned the almost perfect cross-platform browser extension that was compatible with most if not all chromium based browser and missing only some minor cleanups by some dreck that is installed into the user profile of each Windows user? Have your developers ever heard of Software Restriction Policies (SRP)?

Just so you know, the browser extension was buggy and limited due to the Chrome environment. The new DesktopApp (which will be ported to Mac as well) is much better and more functional.

 

[Christian_B]

Just so you know, the browser extension was buggy and limited due to the Chrome environment.

That's a truism. Every software is buggy. While I was extremely critical of the web client initially, the browser extension fixed all my concerns. I've been using the browser extension for probably two years every working day and the only issue I witnessed was that the dialer sometimes didn't update its Window during an incoming call. This happened apparently due to some update in Chromium. Since the app was still ringing and functional this was a pretty minor inconvience.
I'm sure there are a hundred bugs more. At least it didn't require a fundamentally insecure system configuration.

 

[Evolute IT]

That's a truism. Every software is buggy. While I was extremely critical of the web client initially, the browser extension fixed all my concerns. I've been using the browser extension for probably two years every working day and the only issue I witnessed was that the dialer sometimes didn't update its Window during an incoming call. This happened apparently due to some update in Chromium. Since the app was still ringing and functional this was a pretty minor inconvience.
I'm sure there are a hundred bugs more. At least it didn't require a fundamentally insecure system configuration.

Oh boy. Insecure config? The new app uses the same freaking technology (WEBRTC). What's the problem then?

 

[Christian_B]

Oh boy. Insecure config? The new app uses the same freaking technology (WEBRTC). What's the problem then?

Quoting myself:
"Have your developers ever heard of Software Restriction Policies (SRP)?"

Obviously not. Here's some input for you:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...iction-policies/software-restriction-policies

 

[Evolute IT]

Quoting myself:
"Have your developers ever heard of Software Restriction Policies (SRP)?"

Obviously not. Here's some input for you:
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/wi...iction-policies/software-restriction-policies

We use ThreatLocker with the app. That's fine.

Ever heard about Chrome extensions not being secured compared to a desktop app? I guess not.

 

[Christian_B]

We use group policies to restrict users to certain browser extensions.

 

[Evolute IT]

We use group policies to restrict users to certain browser extensions.

And you can do the same with apps.

(We can also do that in ThreatLocker.)

 

[Christian_B]

And you can do the same with apps.

(We can also do that in ThreatLocker.)

That is true to some extent. However, as the new desktop is installed into a user writable directory, this means we have to add and update a hash-based rule for each update. A normal application is installed into directories which cannot be modified by normal users which makes securing the system a one-time task. If it was possible to install the new desktop app into %programfiles% as it was with 3CX Softphone for Windows, my concern would be invalidated.
I don't see why the app should be installed in the user's profile. If it's just so that the user can update the app or the app can do itself, this can be achieved easily by installing a privileged scheduled task. I would think that any company that takes security seriously, does not allow the average employee to install software themselves.

 

[Evolute IT]

That is true to some extent. However, as the new desktop is installed into a user writable directory, this means we have to add and update a hash-based rule for each update. A normal application is installed into directories which cannot be modified by normal users which makes securing the system a one-time task. If it was possible to install the new desktop app into %programfiles% as it was with 3CX Softphone for Windows, my concern would be invalidated.
I don't see why the app should be installed in the user's profile. If it's just so that the user can update the app or the app can do itself, this can be achieved easily by installing a privileged scheduled task. I would think that any company that takes security seriously, does not allow the average employee to install software themselves.

Many apps work by installing in the appdata, like Chrome and VSCode.

Yes it's more complex for updates, we do the same, but our tool does it automatically and can be configured to learn the new files based on rules.

 

[Ayia Napa George]

Just so you know, the browser extension was buggy and limited due to the Chrome environment. The new DesktopApp (which will be ported to Mac as well) is much better and more functional.

So NO LINUX ???
You talk about windows and mac, but no Linux....

What do you think I will do on Linux ?

 

[Evolute IT]

So NO LINUX ???
You talk about windows and mac, but no Linux....

What do you think I will do on Linux ?

Use the Webclient.

 

[Ayia Napa George]

Use the Webclient.

Why can't Win and MAC users use Webclient as you expect Linux users to to?
(I know, this is not your decision or mine.)
I feel sad somehow as a Linux user, always being treated as an insignificant minority of freaks.

 

[Satpal Singh]

I have GOIP4 Voip GSM Network Gateway, I want to route every GSM Sim call to a different extension. Like Sim 1 received by Extn 1001 and outgoing by extn 1001 should be using Sim1 only. So that we all can make and receive calls to our own business, if needed we can transfer the calls via extension. Is it possible?

 

[Evolute IT]

I have GOIP4 Voip GSM Network Gateway, I want to route every GSM Sim call to a different extension. Like Sim 1 received by Extn 1001 and outgoing by extn 1001 should be using Sim1 only. So that we all can make and receive calls to our own business, if needed we can transfer the calls via extension. Is it possible?

(Replied in the dedicated thread.)