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

Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 460 posts

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#21

Post by tentacleuno »

tapoxi wrote: post #15
tentacleuno wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> who is finally putting their foot down and deciding that we are all going to be forced to either used fully-locked down devices The person who wrote the proposal[0] is from Google. All the authors of the proposal are from Google[1]. I've been thinking carefully about this comment, but I really don't know what to say. It's absolutely heartbreaking watching something I really care about die by a thousand cuts; how do…

I mean Firefox caved to support EME. This isn't the early days of the web anymore either, the enthusiasts are a small minority of global web traffic that this will probably succeed even with a large scale boycott.

I still remember the controversy surrounding EME, a LOT of people came out against it (including the EFF[0]); despite that, they still triumphed on[1].

[0]: https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-makes-formal-objectio... [1]: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#22

Post by garganzol »

The empire strikes again being driven by the insatiable greed. Just wait till its minions will fill up this thread with classical astroturfing and comments in vain of "We were waiting for this feature since forever!" and "It's for better security". I can also easily see how they massively downvote everyone who disagrees with the righteous direction of The Corporation. This is so Orwellian 1984.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#26

Post by danielvaughn »

caesil wrote: post #9

Whether you like it or not (and I certainly don't), you've gotta sort of admire the sheer vision of a fifteen-year project to build a browser so good it comes to monopolize the industry, all because you've had the foresight to realize that monopoly will be crucial to securing your position as the adtech hegemon. An underrated masterpiece of evil genius.

It's like they had the same dream that IE had back in the 90's, except they actually had the patience and fortitude to see it through.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#27

Post by ahahahahah »

tentacleuno wrote: post #21
tapoxi wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean Firefox caved to support EME. This isn't the early days of the web anymore either, the enthusiasts are a small minority of global web traffic that this will probably succeed even with a large scale boycott.

I still remember the controversy surrounding EME, a LOT of people came out against it (including the EFF[0]); despite that, they still triumphed on[1]. [0]: https://www.eff.org/press/releases/eff-makes-formal-objectio... [1]: https://github.com/w3c/encrypted-media

And thank god for that, otherwise we'd still need to support flash to use most popular websites.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#29

Post by pmlnr »

tentacleuno wrote: post #13
saurik wrote: post #5

This is pretty much the inevitable end-game of the web, in no small part funded by ad-based business models (as the analog gap pretty much destroys most attempts to use this stuff to do copy protection) and enabled by developers who have insisted we shove as much difficult-to-implement functionality (by which I am talking about CSS complex stuff, not powerful-but-easy-to-code APIs for OS-level access) into the browse…

> who is finally putting their foot down and deciding that we are all going to be forced to either used fully-locked down devices The person who wrote the proposal[0] is from Google. All the authors of the proposal are from Google[1]. I've been thinking carefully about this comment, but I really don't know what to say. It's absolutely heartbreaking watching something I really care about die by a thousand cuts; how do…

> how do we protest this

The proposal for Chrome, you don't, because there's no stopping it. See DRM, Secure Boot, all the rest of the shitshow pursuing "trusted environment". It'll never happen, but CEOs won't accept reality.

You can, however, embrace the rest: eg. keep serving your own content on http (along with https), gopher for retro compatibility, and because they are less prone to break.

Keep using your current device for browsing, and whatever refuses to serve you either leave it for good or keep a spare chromebook for all the "services" you can't avoid to use, like banking.

I don't have a better route. It's a bit like streaming: if I want resolution above 480p, I use a Chromecast with Android TV.

Re: Web Environment Integrity API Proposal

#30

Post by jabbany »

dmantis wrote: post #7

The literal attempt to censor web usage of Linux and BSD desktops, other FOSS clients, custom Android ROMs, etc with an open reasoning "to sell you ads". They don't even try to masquerade it.

Yeah I mean the first of their examples is literally:

> Users like visiting websites that are expensive to create and maintain, but they often want or need to do it without paying directly. These websites fund themselves with ads, but the advertisers can only afford to pay for humans to see the ads, rather than robots. This creates a need for human users to prove to websites that they're human, sometimes through tasks like challenges or logins.

I find it quite cute that they start with "users" as if it's a user demand but in the next sentence switch to "advertisers" --- the real target population.

Post reply on HN