Like, flat-out.

This 'feature' means that someone in an abusive relationship now has a canonized part of the OS monitoring their activities that can be then invoked and studied by the abuser.

Ain't no amount of -group policy- bullshit gonna fix this,

because Microsoft -doesn't allow- the granularity of administration required to defuse this for non-corporate users.

"Use Linux" is not an appropriate response.

People do not always have the agency to choose their operational environment and you cannot fix structural unsafety with individual choice.

This is not a jape nor a joke, and I am not willing to countenance this as an argument.

Do not perpetuate abusive situations by blaming a victim for the environment they are in.

How -do- you fix this?

You do not put the capability to automate screen-scraping into the OS as a canonized feature.

Yes, this does not stop screen scraping from being possible - it's been around for years.

Disallowing it from the canonical image -of- the OS, however, means that there is an increased barrier in the way of implementing this: an abuser will need to learn how to implement this, and will need to rely on third-party software not integrated into the OS as expected functionality.

This in turn means that abuse victims are able to rely on tools already in-use to remove third-party software from the computer in order to have more assurance of private operation.

Yes, no single measure is capable of ensuring safety.

This is why it's a security -system- and not a security -item-; systemic effects require an understanding of the entire context in order to evaluate the safety or unsafety of the system.