1411
Mozilla officially opposes Web Enviroment Integrity API (DRM for web pages proposal from Google) (github.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
127 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 years ago* (8 children)

That’s not true - you can still use ad blockers etc as normal.

It’s also not a browser check, it’s a device check. It’s to check that the device can be trusted, like android itself hasn’t been tampered with.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 19 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    That's equally stupid though... why shouldn't I be able to tamper with my phone's operating system? And how is it any of a website's business if I do?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    You can tamper all you want, but apps can already block access to devices that have been tampered with. This just gives that same power to websites.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago

    ... yes, and I am obviously very against giving that same power to websites lol. An app is built from the ground up as a UX created by the company, and that is what you are signing up for when you use an app. A browser should be a contained way of rendering data from some webserver according to a user's preferences. Google is apparently trying to "app-ify" web protocols in order to give themselves more power over a user's experience to the detriment of the user.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    So people with custom roms or on various Linux distros would be fucked?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 3 years ago

    How could it not be a browser check if the website relies on the browser to be a middle man? The WebDRM that was pushed by a terrorist organization W3C, currently requires per-browser licensing.

    Per wikipedia:

    EME has been highly controversial because it places a necessarily proprietary, closed decryption component which requires per-browser licensing fees into what might otherwise be an entirely open and free software ecosystem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent