Here is an idea: If WEI is available use it to block chrome otherwise allow access disregarding WEI. XD
I used to have a little website in middle school that banned Chrome by user agent, cause even back then (2008) I said it was evil.
Your computer should say what you tell it to say
41–50 of 263 posts
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#42> A handful of companies have established chokepoints between buyers and sellers, performers and audiences, workers and employers, as well as families and communities. When those companies refuse to deal with you, your digital life grinds to a halt
This short paragraph summarizes the (ex-ante) improbably unusual situation we have drifted into.
The negatively affected stakeholders being enumerated are more or less the entire society.
These gatekeepers and chokepoint operators do have a few natural allies (the captured politicos, others in direct or indirect payroll, externality-blind markets). Yet somehow they can bully into submission basically the entire universe. With its infinite financial, political, intellectual resources.
Rather strange dont you think? It almost as if they already operate effective mind control at systemic scale.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#43I read the entire thing and it’s not clear how this reduces control of your own computer. It seems the premise is that those with a computer should be able to access others servers wholesale unconditionally. This premise is obviously wrong. > It also raises the barrier to entry for new browsers, something Google employees acknowledged in an unofficial explainer for the new feature, Web Environment Integrity (WEI). Th…
It reduces control of my computer because without it my computer can identify itself to websites and advertisers in the way that I want, but with it, it can only use its TPM assigned identity. You can argue (I'd disagree) that it's a good thing that I can't make my computer spoof as something else, but unquestionably it does reduce my control.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
that's all great but you realize a lot of readers here are not USA, eh? "web-TPM" needs to be named-and-shamed among literate people in all nations IMHO. It is clearly political -- there are private winners and public losers in the change to locked and enforced access to digital content on the Internet. Any commercial company in any country that can successfully block the roads and check ID will make money, and they…
Your ability to mischaracterize it as "webtpm" makes me question your credibility entirely. It's fine to be opposed to the proposal, but it would be best to stay truthful and not exaggerate.
It is web-TPM. Yes the spec theoretically allows for any kind of attestation, but in practice it's only useful with hardware security like TPM involved.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#45Would it be possible for attackers/fraudsters to just set up "proxy farms" of real hardware that provide the device details for attestation? It would make bots less efficient but surely the incentive for ad fraud would still exist and adaptations would be made.
Yes, but in theory if suspicious behavior was detected those devices could be permanently blacklisted from a website, making the investment challenging.
If WEI goes through we'll probably see cheap PCs popping up on eBay that are unable to access certain websites.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#46That's a very well-written explanation! I would hope that we see this kind of explanation more frequently.
Nope, not really. Still looks like the equivalent of anti-encryption people saying "think of the children". I still see no explanation on how WEI will magically change the behavior of website operators. They can already take steps
to block unwanted clients, but no one is in any significant way which hinders the "open internet". WEI is meaningless unless Apple implements it. The only effect the current discussion will have on Apple is how they publicly frame their choice.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#47I read the entire thing and it’s not clear how this reduces control of your own computer. It seems the premise is that those with a computer should be able to access others servers wholesale unconditionally. This premise is obviously wrong. > It also raises the barrier to entry for new browsers, something Google employees acknowledged in an unofficial explainer for the new feature, Web Environment Integrity (WEI). Th…
> it wouldn’t necessarily get rid of an open web as it’s entirely optional
The devil is just right there. If an implementor is dominant, and that the feature starts to be used extensively by banks / utility providers or other essential utility, nothing prevent those users to enforce using browsers implementing it, event if it's optional per spec.
The feature then become de-facto mandatory for all implementors, and in the long run google can start refusing serving apps on non-compliants to their de-facto standard without much fuss outside the tech people.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#48That's a very well-written explanation! I would hope that we see this kind of explanation more frequently.
So much better written than the articles that were at the top of HN originally. People somehow thought this would mean checking for ad block? The original proposal specifically called out that browser extensions are completely unrelated to WEI, which just calls into existing OS and TPM-based attestation APIs and makes the status of this attestation available to sites.
> People somehow thought this would mean checking for ad block?
No, the worry about adblock was that Google could now just remove the ability for that work in chrome and there would be nothing you could do, because your forked chromium wouldn't pass the attestation check (cause it would never be blessed by Google). This concern extends to other browsers as well. Because Google is making themselves the signing authority here, they can choose which browsers are allowed and which aren't, letting them force other browsers to add or drop certain features if they want to be granted attestation.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#49I read the entire thing and it’s not clear how this reduces control of your own computer. It seems the premise is that those with a computer should be able to access others servers wholesale unconditionally. This premise is obviously wrong. > It also raises the barrier to entry for new browsers, something Google employees acknowledged in an unofficial explainer for the new feature, Web Environment Integrity (WEI). Th…
Imagine this:
You buy a house. Your house has a little box by the front door. The box holds a small House Environment Integrity (HEI) module. This HEI is something your local Home Owners Association installed. They say you cannot open the box or investigate how the module inside works, as this is against the HOA and you will be fined. They tell you this HEI module is meant to help and protect you. To make sure the plumber you hire didn't do a bad job or that the paint you used on your walls doesn't contain lead. They say it's for your benefit and to make your home a better and safer place. This does not reduce the control of your own house.
Re: Your computer should say what you tell it to say
#50Remember: upvoting the EFF's articles is good, but you (yes, you!) can also donate to them to help with these campaigns!
I had donated to the EFF in the past, but their stance[1] that CDNs/hosted services shouldn't be allowed to choose the customers they are willing work with is not only wrong, it's causes harm[2]. [1] https://www.eff.org/press/releases/international-coalition-r... [2] https://blog.cloudflare.com/kiwifarms-blocked/
I'm happy to make up the loss with my donations.