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

“Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 103 posts

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#81

Post by wkat4242 »

wilsonnb3 wrote: post #41
mrguyorama wrote: post #10

What is Brave going to do when the code for WEI becomes load bearing in the chromium code base? Still excuse after excuse after excuse to just not use Firefox. I literally don't care if you have to hold up your nose, there's only one actual alternative browser engine, and it's a matter of survival for anyone who doesn't want the whole internet controlled by google. It could be half as fast (it isn't) and use twice as…

IMO the best hedges against Googles web monopoly at the moment are Apple and Microsoft, not Mozilla. Apple because of Safari (duh) and Microsoft because they are possibly the only company that could reasonably maintain a hard Chromium fork in the case of Google going crazy. Unfortunately all three of them are more or less aligned on this issue of remote attestation so I don't really see a path forward. Firefox just d…

This might be the trigger for people to use it again though.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#82

Post by wkat4242 »

thewataccount wrote: post #29
mrguyorama wrote: post #10

What is Brave going to do when the code for WEI becomes load bearing in the chromium code base? Still excuse after excuse after excuse to just not use Firefox. I literally don't care if you have to hold up your nose, there's only one actual alternative browser engine, and it's a matter of survival for anyone who doesn't want the whole internet controlled by google. It could be half as fast (it isn't) and use twice as…

> Still excuse after excuse after excuse to just not use Firefox. What happens when Firefox refuses to implement WEI - then start to require it? If WEI becomes a common requirement then Firefox will effectively be forced to implement it or it won't be usable as a web browser at that point for the average consumer

Most people don't really interact with social media via the web anymore anyway. They use apps.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#83

Post by thewataccount »

kaba0 wrote: post #78
antisthenes wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is The fight was lost long ago, several times (once when they decided to throw out thousands of developer work years by gimping all the addons)

Google is just as beholden to Firefox existing, if it doesn’t want to be sued to oblivion.

I'm not sure "I'm not a monopoly, look my competitor owns 2% of the market" is an effective defense anyway?

I think only Safari really counts as a "competitor" at 20% market share and doesn't share the chromium base (compared to edge, etc).

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#85

Post by gmerc »

mrd3v0 wrote: post #65
geraldwhen wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mozilla is a political organization, not a web browser developer. I’ll keep using brave.

Really? Mozilla is a political organisation and Brave, the very same organisation that hires a fired Mozilla CEO that publicly opposes same-sex marriage, is not a political organisation? Cool.

Every corporation is political. To pretend otherwise is … American.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#86

Post by gabrielsroka »

postalrat wrote: post #56
gabrielsroka wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see that at all. I've been using Brave for years and nothing to do with crypto. There is a BAT thing, but you can disable it.

The BAT thing is the cryptocurrency. No thanks.

I said that, but you can disable it.

Can you explain your comment? Is it forcing me to use crypto and I'm not aware of it? Am I mining?

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#87

Post by JohnFen »

somat wrote: post #71
JohnFen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly, I do, yes! But I've given up on trying to nail down what the issue actually is after about a year of trying. It exists on all of my machines, so it's likely related to some other piece of software I commonly use. I just don't know which one. I am not asserting that FF is bad and nobody should use it. I'm asserting that there are some people (at least one, anyway) who can't use it. Shaming people for not usin…

my guess is filtered dns. I just audited my system(firefox 110 on openbsd). and when dns is acting up(I disabled external dns leaving only my internal domains resolvable) firefox takes forever to do anything waiting on dns timeouts. firefox is making requests to www.google.com #why? I don't have google set as my default search engine. detectportal.firefox.com 9.9.9.9.https #???? this is strange. DoH? but I should hav…

That's entirely possible. It does smell like something's waiting for a timeout of some sort. But the times are very long. About 5 minutes to start the browser, and while not every page render incurs a delay, when they do, the delay is on the order of a minute or so.

In any case, I really have spent a lot of time digging into this. At some point, I just had to let it go.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#88

Post by JohnFen »

pieter_mj wrote: post #80
JohnFen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Clearly, I do, yes! But I've given up on trying to nail down what the issue actually is after about a year of trying. It exists on all of my machines, so it's likely related to some other piece of software I commonly use. I just don't know which one. I am not asserting that FF is bad and nobody should use it. I'm asserting that there are some people (at least one, anyway) who can't use it. Shaming people for not usin…

>It exists on all of my machines What machines, did you assemble the hardware yourself? On a reasonably modern android phone, firefox is fluent even with dozens of tabs and there's nothing you can do to make it slow.

No, none of these machines are ones that I've assembled myself (and even if they were, so what?). They are all Linux machines. I only very rarely browse the web from my phone, so a browser's behavior on Android isn't relevant to me.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#89

Post by JohnFen »

kaba0 wrote: post #79
JohnFen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox is legitimately not an option for me. It's literally unusably slow. So slow that it's not actually better than no browser at all.

These comments should are as useful as claiming that that magic alternative bullshit medicine cured my cancer. N=1, not reproducible and likely has zero relevance. You should post to firefox support/some stackexchange site or whatever to fix your problem, not comment on the quality of a product you have failed to properly evaluate.

I was not seeking support here, nor offering some sort of review. I was pushing back against the shaming of people who don't use Firefox by pointing out that not everyone has the option.

> You should post to firefox support/some stackexchange site or whatever

Interesting that you assume I haven't done these things already.

Also interesting is the level of hostility in your reply, plus the downvotes my original comment got. The FF fanbase seems to have become a bit irrational and intolerant of anything said about FF that isn't fawning praise. That's disappointing.

Re: “Web Environment Integrity”: Locking Down the Web

#90

Post by phero_cnstrcts »

mrguyorama wrote: post #10

What is Brave going to do when the code for WEI becomes load bearing in the chromium code base? Still excuse after excuse after excuse to just not use Firefox. I literally don't care if you have to hold up your nose, there's only one actual alternative browser engine, and it's a matter of survival for anyone who doesn't want the whole internet controlled by google. It could be half as fast (it isn't) and use twice as…

As soon as I can use custom shortcuts I’ll switch back to Firefox again.
Post reply on HN