The possibility that this is a thinly veiled attempt at introducing Digital Rights Management into web pages is a concern that should not be dismissed lightly. This may well be a sly effort to muzzle ad-blocking capabilities, thus reducing the web to a cacophonous bazaar of incessant advertisements, a capitalist wet dream at the expense of user experience. I echo the critics who view this as a potential threat to the open web. Furthermore, the question of who controls the "attesters" is a serious concern that evokes dystopian scenarios of a digital oligarchy. In a world increasingly reliant on digital verification, the potential to manipulate trust scores essentially hands over the reins of the digital world to a select few. This, far from enhancing trust, could potentially further erode it.
The ambiguity surrounding browser modifications and extensions further fuels suspicions. In its guise of ensuring legitimacy, the proposal seems to conveniently overlook the diversity and customization that has been a hallmark of the digital world, creating an environment of dubious one-size-fits-all integrity.
Moreover, the vague explanation of the enforcement and establishment of baseline requirements does little to allay fears of vendor exclusion. What are these requirements and who indeed gets to decide them?