Ars TechnicaGoogle’s “Web Integrity API” sounds like DRM for the web
It's just a "proposal," but it's also being prototyped inside Chrome right now.
BoredomFestival@arstechnica this is no longer the web, just a sparkling JavaScript app platform
Princess UnikittyOh crap. Guess it's back to Firefox for me.
I simply do not need a big brother making sure my "browser hasn't been modified or tampered with in any unapproved ways."
Rawwwb@arstechnica As some very smart people have pointed out, the only possible use for this feature is some type of DRM lockout. The designers wrote an essay explaining that they hope lockout can be avoided, but then they go ahead and build the technology that makes lockouts inevitable. The explanations coming from Google are bizarre and self-contradictory.
Nick@arstechnica web integrity doesn’t sound cozy enough. Perhaps “fluffy bunnies milkshakes and rainbows API” might sound more relaxing. People should just switch back to Firefox. It works great.
"websites trusting the client environment" is about as smart as blindly injecting params into a SQL statement
meejah@theocs @arstechnica Yes, but that's unlikely the _actual_ point here.
More likely it's something along the lines of allowing Web sites to block you using them without e.g. confirming your ad-blocker is off and they have unfettered access to your brain...
Toni Aittoniemi@arstechnica Letting big tech make all these decisions on their own is pretty risky.
Due to the probably coming assault of intelligent bot-fueled personalised propaganda (probably by Dec this year), it will become necessary to prove humanness very soon.
But that doesn’t have to be where privacy ends if nation-states step in as the legal providers #human #authentication and guarantee #anonymity at least for interactions with corporations.
But they payrolled the politicians.
Silicon Underground (Dave F)@arstechnica switch to Firefox if you haven't already.
(this message was composed on Firefox)
given safetynet was readily abused for non-reasons in apps, i'd not be enthused to see it proliferate into the web.
keep the web free
Zorro Notorious MEB 😡@arstechnica It sounds anti-competitive to me and once again, the USA may have to wait for the European Union to find it anti-competitive. 😡
Claudio Cicali@arstechnica If this obscenity passes and gets adopted widely, unfortunately I don't think that using another browser would solve anything. Part of the proposal is related to some kind of server side enforcement, so the risk is that a website may be able to require it and if your browser doesn't support this bullshit, you can't use that website. I hope to be wrong here