Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

chromestatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 99 posts

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#11

Post by Asooka »

warkdarrior wrote: post #6
jauntywundrkind wrote: post #2

> Motivation: Users often depend on websites trusting the client environment they run in. Aka corporations insist on control & want to make sure users are powerless when using the site. And Chrome is absolutely here to help the megacorp's radically progress the War On General Purpose Computing and make sure users are safe & securely tied to environments where they are powerless. There's notably absolutely no discussi…

How do you, as website owner, protect your users from something like this? https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/451-pypi-pack...

You do not, the user is responsible for the operation of their device. Most of the time this should be caught by whatever malicious software detector the user runs. Also, Chrome and Firefox very heavily guard against extensions being installed from outside of the usual way, i.e. by outside programs.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#12

Post by prox »

jauntywundrkind wrote: post #2

> Motivation: Users often depend on websites trusting the client environment they run in. Aka corporations insist on control & want to make sure users are powerless when using the site. And Chrome is absolutely here to help the megacorp's radically progress the War On General Purpose Computing and make sure users are safe & securely tied to environments where they are powerless. There's notably absolutely no discussi…

“who generally I actually really do trust to be doing good”

These are mega corporations and you aren’t the client. They aren’t making Chrome “for you”. They are for optimizing for Advertisers.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#13

Post by charcircuit »

kevincox wrote: post #7
Klonoar wrote: post #3

AKA: The shadow war on bot traffic continues humming along.

Bot traffic? Anyone using Linux will get blocked because "they can't be trusted". Only people running an "approved" operating system from a billion dollar corporation will be allowed to access. This is already what is happening with SafetyNet on Android. For now most applications don't require hardware attestation so you can pass by spoofing an old device that didn't support hardware attestation but I'm sure that wil…

You don't have to be a billion dollar corporation to become Play Protect certified.

Being able to trust the security of a client can protect against many attacks and it is up to web sites to evaluate what to do with into information that a client is proven to be secure.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#15

Post by 38 »

greyface- wrote: post #14

API spec: https://rupertbenwiser.github.io/Web-Environment-Integrity/ It's morbidly amusing to see the browser referred to as a "user agent" here.

nothing amusing about it, just a simple statement of fact:

> A user agent is a computer program representing a person, for example, a browser in a Web context.

https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Glossary/User_agent

> Examples include all common web browsers, such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#16

Post by spookie »

kevincox wrote: post #7
Klonoar wrote: post #3

AKA: The shadow war on bot traffic continues humming along.

Bot traffic? Anyone using Linux will get blocked because "they can't be trusted". Only people running an "approved" operating system from a billion dollar corporation will be allowed to access. This is already what is happening with SafetyNet on Android. For now most applications don't require hardware attestation so you can pass by spoofing an old device that didn't support hardware attestation but I'm sure that wil…

Can confirm that it's palpable the segregation and poor treatment of Linux users. I need to make my browser talk as if it was on Windows just for websites to not treat me as garbage.

Look, it isn't that bad, but enough to make me do it. It's obnoxious.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#17

Post by greyface- »

38 wrote: post #15
greyface- wrote: post #14

API spec: https://rupertbenwiser.github.io/Web-Environment-Integrity/ It's morbidly amusing to see the browser referred to as a "user agent" here.

nothing amusing about it, just a simple statement of fact: > A user agent is a computer program representing a person, for example, a browser in a Web context. https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Glossary/User_agent > Examples include all common web browsers, such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari https://wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent

I'm aware of the history of the term. It's not an accurate statement of fact if the browser isn't acting on behalf of or towards the interests of the user.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#18

Post by 38 »

akomtu wrote: post #10

I'm surprised the ad corps haven't forked the internet yet: special drm-ed websites accessible only via special drm-ed browsers. At least it would relieve those who want to share knowledge from the presence of those who sell addiction.

I guess you've never heard of Widevine?

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Widevine

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#19

Post by 38 »

greyface- wrote: post #17
38 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nothing amusing about it, just a simple statement of fact: > A user agent is a computer program representing a person, for example, a browser in a Web context. https://developer.mozilla.org/docs/Glossary/User_agent > Examples include all common web browsers, such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, and Safari https://wikipedia.org/wiki/User_agent

I'm aware of the history of the term. It's not an accurate statement of fact if the browser isn't acting on behalf of or towards the interests of the user.

I agree with you, but in regards to Chrome, thats been the case for at least 10 years, so I'm not sure what good pointing it out now will do. that ship has sailed, and aint comin back. better would be to point people toward better options, if they exist.

Re: Google Chrome Proposal – Web Environment Integrity

#20

Post by esperent »

spookie wrote: post #16
kevincox wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bot traffic? Anyone using Linux will get blocked because "they can't be trusted". Only people running an "approved" operating system from a billion dollar corporation will be allowed to access. This is already what is happening with SafetyNet on Android. For now most applications don't require hardware attestation so you can pass by spoofing an old device that didn't support hardware attestation but I'm sure that wil…

Can confirm that it's palpable the segregation and poor treatment of Linux users. I need to make my browser talk as if it was on Windows just for websites to not treat me as garbage. Look, it isn't that bad, but enough to make me do it. It's obnoxious.

Try accessing the web from a developing country, no matter what OS you use.
Post reply on HN