Comment on Google DRM / WEI

ISOmorph@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

• wallmenis@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  It will stop you from using tools like ublock origin which help mitigate tracking.

  source
• Karcinogen@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The project would only allow “verified” web browsers. This means that the only web browsers you can use are the ones that Google has allowed: owned by big companies. It would prevent smaller, privacy friendly web browsers from being a part of the internet.

  source
• dukethorion@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Not only browsers, but operating system as well. Using GrapheneOS, eOS, or whatever?

  Denied. Stock OS only on OUR internet, sorry.

  source
• RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The idea of it is as simple as it is dangerous. It would provide websites with an API telling them whether the browser and the platform it is running on that is currently in use is trusted by an authoritative third party (called an attester). The details are nebulous, but the goal seems to be to prevent “fake” interactions with websites of all kinds. While this seems like a noble motivation, and the use cases listed seem very reasonable, the solution proposed is absolutely terrible and has already been equated with DRM for websites, with all that it implies.

  It’s all a bit nebulous at the moment, but at least initially it seems to me like your browser’s “attester” would have a lot of insights into your browsing habits. It also has the potential of killing 3rd party browsers like FF who could lose access to websites unless they jump onboard, and who may still lose access if websites decide not to trust their (hopefully more private) attestation service.

  There’s still a lot of whatifs floating around because Google just surprise pulled this project out of their ass days ago after working on it in secret for at least a year.

  source
• dngray@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Not unless websites require certain features to be visible, that’s the major concern.

  source