cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/2546109
Read why “Web Environment Integrity” is terrible, and why we must vocally oppose it now. Google’s latest maneuver, if we don’t act to stop it, threatens our freedom to explore the Internet with browsers of our choice.
There’s something no one seems to be talking about
this isn’t limited to your browser
It runs at the highest ring of security on your processor. It could mean it locks you to OEM Android, iOS, or Windows. It could be extended to look at your app list, dns settings, potentially even tell if the device is using a vpn
it could be paired with kosa to use biometrics to verify identity
And it would be shocking if cloudflare didn’t implement this - it would save them a ton of processing. It’s likely it would be a default setting - this would apply to large swaths of the Internet, not just Google services
Then we’ll have to write our own chips and design our own hardware. Which is surprisingly easier than it sounds.
Why is everyone making noise about Google’s implementation while barely anyone is making noise about Apple’s, which is already in use? https://httptoolkit.com/blog/apple-private-access-tokens-attestation/
My guess is that Apple just rolled it out silently, while Google goes through a standards process with a public RFC. (edit: Also, Safari isn’t as commonly used).
No but they have the power to fundamentally alter how we use it.
Look at what happened after the launch of the iPhone. Flash was killed, and devs moved to mobile-first or even mobile-only development for web and apps. It completely altered how we used the web, the Internet, and what devs focus on.
That’s a good question. Safari market share isn’t as big as Chrome’s (62.55% vs 20.5%, according to statcounter), but it’s still the 2nd largest. Also note that the WEI proposal appeared around May but made the news only now.
Safari’s market share definitely isn’t as big, that’s a good point. However, it’s got 100% market share on iPhones (Apple forbid other browser engines from running on iOS), so there’s a lot of people that have no choice.
So sick of “just use Firefox” as if everyone has forgotten how the last company to bend the web to it’s will using a browser didn’t kill the very thing Firefox was born out of. Either google doesn’t do this or it doesn’t matter if you use Firefox, your browser will either comply or die like Netscape Navigator.
I don’t see how this could be prevented.
There are already many “small web” movements. With different proposals. Like gemini, sub-set of currently supported web standards (typically no-js, no-css, no POST, etc…)
But the monetized web is doomed to reach a point were it will be controlled in such a way that you will not be able to block ads, not be able to hide your pseudonymous identity.
I remember reading an article many years ago about the cat and mouse game between ads publishers and ad-blockers. The conclusion were that in the end, ads blocker will lose the final war. And with these kind of system we are closer and closer to reach it.
I think we need to collectively find a way to have sub-nets. For example declare that our website conform to certain sub-net properties.
- no-ads
- privacy (no cookie/no js/no user-agent header/no canvas, no css)
- etc…
The small webs are different for everyone. It would be very nice if we could put an HTML header that would list which small webs pattern this page is compatible with. And have a browser that would adapt to your preferences and also a way to filter your small-web preferences in search engine.
The closest to this we have today is probably gemini. But this a very small but friendly web. I am sure we could find other solutions to create an alternative “respecting his users” web.
" it will be used by Google to deny access to their services unless you are using a browser that gels with their profit margin"
Cool. So people using a different browser will move elsewhere. Maybe they’ll even stop youtube addiction. Cant’ really see a downside.
“It is not far-fetched to imagine a future in which sites simply refuse to serve pages to users running free browsers or free operating systems.”
Same here. Sites doing this wouldn’t probably worth to be looked at anyway.
It’s pretty key to the internet that you can access websites using any web browser or configuration you’d like, though.
While it’s true that some websites could just be avoided, if any government, education or healthcare websites implement this “for security”, the user will be forced to download and use a verified browser.
In my opinion this proposal strips users of their freedoms and should be canned.
sites doing this probably wouldn’t be worth using anyways
what about when your bank adds this? have you tried using a safetynet enforcing app on a rooted android phone? this has bigger implications than you’re seeing
lemm.ee was talking about using cloudflare (i can’t remember whether he went through with it), which will almost certainly implement this. lemmy.world already does. there is no good outcome from this going through where this only blocks google sites from firefox.
even if there was, that still means you can’t open any gdrive links you find on the internet, use a youtube tutorial to fix something, use the play store to buy any apps (because if they integrate this into chrome, they will integrate it into the play store), etc.
edit 2023-08-10:
hey guess what engywuck, lemm.ee uses cloudflare now:
good luck accessing lemm.ee from non-chromium if this goes through
in fact view you probably won’t be able to view any embedded youtube videos at all. people would have to go back to hosting their own videos which would push hosting costs up, which would raise the barrier of entry to people making their own sites. which is something we want to encourage
