Have a look. see screenshots Someone closer to dev will have to chime in. https://biketerra.com/pages/faq https://caniuse.com/web-bluetooth

Thanks for finding that! Yes I hope one of the devs can comment when they have time :-)

You can also open a bug and see if someone will provide an update on why it's not supported.

Bug report submitted :-) https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1939709

Good luck with your bug, but I don't think we want to support WebUSB due to potentially malicious uses of this technology.

WebUSB? is that different to web Bluetooth ? The devices (smart trainer/HR/Power meter) connect over Bluetooth which can be either through external (USB) dongle or internal PCIA Bluetooth :-)

You need to change the product in your bug report. For some reason it has Fenix which is for Android. see screenshot Need to change that to Windows.

Fenix is the codename for Firefox for Android. It may have been the Bugbot that moved it from Firefox to Fenix for some reason.

Thanks guys! Yes BUGBOT moved it 🙂 I’ve moved it back to Firefox 😀

Hi

You can see Mozilla's current position on Web Bluetooth at https://mozilla.github.io/standards-positions/#web-bluetooth

Hi Paul! Thanks for the response 😃. I didn't realise it was so far down when viewing on my Phone ☺️. Now I see it.

Description

   This document describes an API to discover and communicate with devices over the Bluetooth 4 wireless standard using the Generic Attribute Profile (GATT).

Rationale

   This API provides access to the Generic Attribute Profile (GATT) of Bluetooth, which is not the lowest level of access that the specifications allow, but its generic nature makes it impossible to clearly evaluate. Like WebUSB there is significant uncertainty regarding how well prepared devices are to receive requests from arbitrary sites. The generic nature of the API means that this risk is difficult to manage. The Web Bluetooth CG has opted to only rely on user consent, which we believe is not sufficient protection. This proposal also uses a blocklist, which will require constant and active maintenance so that vulnerable devices aren't exploited. This model is unsustainable and presents a significant risk to users and their devices.

My question would be (as a lay person) are othe browsers at risk or are they built differently so as to avoid any risk?