SamDuede comments on Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal

And how well did that work out? I personally haven't gotten any strike on youtube, using uBlock/mpv on PC, Youtube Revanced on mobile and SmartTube for TV since forever

Also there's this https://invidious.io/. So yeah, it's just the classic cat & mouse game that has been going on for ever since software added drm

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 11 points 3 years ago (4 children)

Google has already lashed out at Invidious though, and they'll keep trying

I agree that in most cases people can find workarounds, but I don't think we should take these things for granted

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 3 years ago (3 children)

Google has no ground to stand on against Invidious

They may harass them but it'll be veeery difficult to chase down all instances

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 7 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Oh, I'm well aware of that, but I also have little faith in the justice system to recognize this

In any case, it seems like a warning shot from Google and an interest in taking down sites like Invidious

I'm not trying to spread doubt, but I also think complacency is dangerous, especially given the history of corporate giants like Google

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 1 point 3 years ago* (1 child)

Steamrolling this change Forcing people to have an incredably invasive change to force you to use chrome or use googled android, or use googled chromebooks.

its incredably bright lines it would destablize trust in anything that agrees with it. If the amrican court doesnt prosecute. It will eather show the ignorance/lies in others or destablize amarican trust in the law.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 3 points 3 years ago

We're talking about a public and justice system that mostly agreed the Patriot Act was a good idea and that ICE protects us from terrorism

Anyone who hasn't already lost trust America and our law has been sleeping for decades

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Nindelofocho@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago

It’s probably a slow roll out for exact cases like this one to ease the backlash. I havent gotten any notice like such either but Im on Firefox. I do fully support invidious though

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 8 points 3 years ago

Notice they are DRMing text and computer code, WSJ and malware brokers are gonna really happy, everyone else had their DRM fix with multimedia

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] spiderman@ani.social 6 points 3 years ago (13 children)

and what kinda of thing does this protect?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 13 child comments

[–] azuth@lemmy.world 16 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Ads. To be precise this on it's own provides a way for servers to be certain of the environment the pages run (browser, plugins, os). Protecting ads or other functions come from servers refusing unattested configurations or configurations they don't like (i.e. running adblock, running firefox, running linux).

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] spiderman@ani.social 9 points 3 years ago

if chrome fully adapts this, this might well be a full blown commerical by chrome for people to switch to firefox. i have been only using chrome only to run our projects locally and test it out.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] baltakatei@sopuli.xyz 5 points 3 years ago

It should be noted that “being certain of the environment the pages run” requires controlling the client software being executed which requires preventing the user from modifying said executable which requires the browser to either be closed source or, more effectively, controlling the user's hardware via blackbox verification chips (e.g. TPM DRM). It's not just advertisers that would benefit but any website that wants to DRM content.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 3 years ago (8 children)

I'd guess it's first gonna be used for streaming TV shows and such. After that it'll probably be used for absurd things

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 8 child comments

[–] spiderman@ani.social 11 points 3 years ago (7 children)

I'd guess it's first gonna be used for streaming TV shows

I thought they were already being protected by DRM.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 3 years ago (6 children)

Kinda, but it doesn't work very well. Using video download manager you can download pretty much every video from the web

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] spiderman@ani.social 3 points 3 years ago (5 children)

Can you recommend me one that can be used to download DRM protected content from OTT platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime and Mubi? Might well as archive the content I watch.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 3 years ago (4 children)

Sadly I can't, netflix won't let me watch anything on Librewolf/Firefox on linux. I'd recommend looking into getting a good proxy, a Jellyfin server and also the *arr stack (Sonarr, etc...)

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] spiderman@ani.social 2 points 3 years ago (3 children)

by proxy, do you mean a vpn?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Yes, personally I use ProtonVPN. Iirc they don't care about copyright laws because they don't really apply in their country, I might be wrong though

Also make sure your ip doesn't get leaked by your torrent client

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] spiderman@ani.social 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

I have been using PIA for sometime. Has port forwarding and have been liking it so far.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] AceSLS@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 years ago

Don't know about that one, you can check for IP address leaks here https://ipleak.net/

Also https://browserleaks.com/ is pretty useful

And last but not least, inform yourself if PIA is trustworthy, some VPN providers gave information about their users to the police

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] HelloHotel@lemm.ee 3 points 3 years ago

Malware, malware encrypts its code so researchers cant crack into it and antivirus cant anilize it. Google is accedentally sponsoring malware

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] pizzahoe@lemm.ee 64 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Some fucking greedy cunts at Google having a vision of internet being accessible only by "approved"(Chrome) browsers/clients.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Zeth0s@reddthat.com 43 points 3 years ago (1 child)

They want to approve the whole environment, including os, even if virtualized or not

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] kevincox@lemmy.ml 22 points 3 years ago

The whole stack will need to be approved. approved browser running on approved OS on approved hardware. Good luck browsing on Linux. The end of user software choice.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Goodie@lemmy.world 22 points 3 years ago

V3 manifest got too much bad press so they had to hinder it's ability to gimp ad block.

So now their trying another approach, this time they will probably develop and push this proposal out, and have multiple adopters before anyone can do anything about it. See also: WebHID.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] grue@lemmy.ml 19 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

Orwellian doublespeak for DRMing and paywalling the web.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[+] kariboka@ursal.zone 5 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

[deleted]

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 11 points 3 years ago

Orwell was never refering to the economics in 1984. It was a dystopia of an autocratic government in an ever autocratic world, that fully infected and controlled every aspect of everyones life. Whether that is for capitalism, or communism wasn't part of it.

Also free capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism is inherently unfree and the less regulated it gets, the more imprisoning it becomes to the normal people.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 17 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

A system for websites to request a proof of the "integrity" of a user's browser and underlying OS/hardware, and "attesters" to check this "integrity" and provide the proof. If that sounds vague, that's because it is. What "integrity" means is for the "attester" to decide.

Google would of course be one of the major "attesters", and could just deny the proof if you installed an ad blocker or VPN for example. In this case you would likely not be able to access the website anymore, because your device is deemed as "untrustworthy".

So it's a way for big companies to decide who can still use big parts of the internet and who can't, based on whether it would make them money.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] ThaNook@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 years ago

every day that passes we are closer to the day using TOR is not an option.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent