Beehaw
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
mastermind ( mastermind@lemm.ee )  to Privacy@lemmy.ml · 3 years ago

Google is already pushing WEI(DRM Webpage) into Chromium

github.com

external-link
message-square
60
link
fedilink
  • cross-posted to:
  • degoogle@lemmy.ml
  • internet@kbin.social
  • privacy@programming.dev
  • technology
  • technology@lemmy.ml
  • technews@radiation.party
  • hackernews@derp.foo
344
external-link

Google is already pushing WEI(DRM Webpage) into Chromium

github.com

mastermind ( mastermind@lemm.ee )  to Privacy@lemmy.ml · 3 years ago
message-square
60
link
fedilink
  • cross-posted to:
  • degoogle@lemmy.ml
  • internet@kbin.social
  • privacy@programming.dev
  • technology
  • technology@lemmy.ml
  • technews@radiation.party
  • hackernews@derp.foo
[wei] Ensure Origin Trial enables full feature · chromium/chromium@6f47a22
github.com
external-link
This CL moves the base::Feature from content_features.h to a generated feature from runtime_enabled_features.json5. This means that the base::Feature can be default-enabled while the web API is co...
alert-triangle
You must log in or # to comment.
  • Gibberish9031 ( Gibberish9031@lemmy.ml ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    3 years ago

    Time to De-Google I guess. I will keep using Firefox and if or when I come across any website pulling this crap I won’t hesitate to blast them to eternity. I suggest everyone else do the same please.

    • sadreality ( sadreality@kbin.social ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      ·
      3 years ago

      Time was a decade ago… But better now than never.

    • worfamerryman ( worfamerryman@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      3 years ago

      I’m just going to stop using sites that implement this tech. Maybe I’ll even make a site and actually contribute to the web with all the free time I’ll have 😇

      • Gibberish9031 ( Gibberish9031@lemmy.ml ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        3 years ago

        It’ll be next to impossible when those websites are your bank and Netflix etc.

        • MartianFox ( MartianFox@feddit.de ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          3 years ago

          Not using Netflix is very possible :) Even easier with the pricing they are up to lately.

          (But I know you were just listing some examples)

          • Gibberish9031 ( Gibberish9031@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 years ago

            True, but things like banking and e-commerce are another very large part of the things people do on the Internet, and those are more likely to follow along than not.

          • arvere ( arvere@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 years ago

            not sure if you’re talking about sailing there, but my point against Netflix would be that there are definitely more things to do in life than sitting through hours of passive low effort entertainment. it’s very obvious but I guess people are slowly forgetting about that

            even gaming is better. at least you’re exercising your brain and motor skills

            the banking thing is something else though. but it’s the kind of thing that’s probably done for security anyway, so it’s not that bad and things like that definitely wouldn’t be profitable enough for all this effort Google and others are putting into it 😅

          • aeternum ( aeternum@kbin.social ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 years ago

            yarrrrrrr

        • worfamerryman ( worfamerryman@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 years ago

          I figured that banks would use it so I have a browser for them and there are alternatives to Netflix that don’t have any drm.

          • XPost3000 ( XPost3000@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 years ago

            Yarrr 🏴‍☠️

        • tkohldesac ( tkohldesac@kbin.social ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 years ago

          I’m out of the loop on this one and I’m probably the minority here but big banks would probably incorporate this whole WEI thing but wouldn’t smaller institutions like credit unions opt out? I apologize for my ignorance, I haven’t looked into this at all. This is the first time I’m hearing about WEI and I’m trying to garner some sort of and idea of what it is via comments rather than reading an article about it like a regular human being.

          • Gibberish9031 ( Gibberish9031@lemmy.ml ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 years ago

            Honestly I am in the same boat, but big banks still make a large portion of the banking system and I don’t why the smaller banks wouldn’t just follow along.

          • argv_minus_one ( argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) Banned
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            Government regulators will most likely force all financial and medical institutions to block all unattested browsers, for “security”.

  • Auster ( Auster@kbin.social ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    3 years ago

    De-google, anyone?

    • Larvitar ( Larvitar@kbin.social ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      3 years ago

      How do you “de-google” when most websites expect most browsers to use chromium and start requiring this to ensure companies buying ad space get the best bang for their buck security?

      • brothershamus ( brothershamus@kbin.social ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 years ago

        Firefox and ublock origin to start. Site requires Chromium? Buh bye now.

        • argv_minus_one ( argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) Banned
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 years ago

          Good luck with that when the site is your bank, your doctor, or your government.

      • The Cuuuuube ( Cube6392@beehaw.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 years ago

        We do to google what we should have done to Microsoft: we stop visiting those sights

        • argv_minus_one ( argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) Banned
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 years ago

          Good luck with that when the site is your bank, your doctor, or your government.

        • Neato ( Neato@kbin.social ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          But we didn’t do it with MS. And they saw that. They were the last real antitrust case that was big.

      • Auster ( Auster@kbin.social ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 years ago

        I agree it is an uphill battle, but it must start somewhere. Else, it only gets worse, and then movements against such abuses will get easily crushed. As I like to say, “the hardest part of a journey is the first step”, but also “the future belongs to those who prepare now”.

        • 30isthenew29 ( 30isthenew29@lemm.ee ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 years ago

          If I can’t internet without ads, I can’t internet at all.

          • Apathy Tree ( ApathyTree@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 years ago

            Same. If my pihole breaks the internet because of this, welp. 🤷🏻‍♀️

  • Justin ( jlh@lemmy.jlh.name ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    3 years ago

    Hacker News discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36876301

    • nanometer ( nanometer@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      3 years ago

      That’s bleak

  • skymtf ( skymtf@pricefield.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    3 years ago

    Honestly this won’t effect me a ton, though I wouldn’t be surprised if I have to boot up a windows virtual machine just to check my bank in a few years cause my bank doesn’t know what Linux is and doesn’t want go trust it. I’m mad about it but given slowly but surely I’ve been replacing everything with FOSS stuff. I just fear one day they will force you to use corpo approved software to use WiFi , or get cell service

    • opt9 ( opt9@feddit.ch ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 years ago

      Just keep dropping Google shit and recommending to others.Critical mass will be hit at some point. There are too many smart and capable people in the world to succumb to a Google world.

  • 30isthenew29 ( 30isthenew29@lemm.ee ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    3 years ago

    So this is a problem for all browsers based on Chromium right???

    • maynarkh ( maynarkh@feddit.nl ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 years ago

      No, it is a problem for all browsers, present and future, period.

      The point is that major websites, even government ones might decide to be only available on Chrome.

      • 30isthenew29 ( 30isthenew29@lemm.ee ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 years ago

        So much for internet freedom…

      • argv_minus_one ( argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) Banned
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        They can already make that decision by looking at your User-Agent, but this gives them an incentive to block other browsers. That is terrifying.

        • maynarkh ( maynarkh@feddit.nl ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          You can spoof that, so they know it’s not a good enforcement mechanism as it can still be sidestepped by extensions. I had to do that for a corporate client when their intranet tried enforcing Chrome on Windows only.

          If Google et al. tried enforcing user agents, they would just lose even more tracking information, as everyone would be scrambling their user agents. This cannot be so easily sidestepped.

    • Maajmaaj ( Maajmaaj@lemmy.ca ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      deleted by creator

  • Redezem ( redezem@infosec.pub ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 years ago

    Question for anyone with more understanding of the implementation…

    Doesn’t this still presume the browser tells the truth to the third party attester? Could we not build something that just straight up lies to the attester? Says I’m a good Google chrome user with no extensions please serve me ads sir?

    • koper ( koper@feddit.nl ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      This system would use cryptography and hardware to make sure that you are unable to lie about any of this. Basically, there is a chip inside your CPU that contains special keys installed by the manufacturer. However, this chip only activates itself when it detects that your device is running the approved software. Furthermore, it is made (almost) impossible to open this chip and retrieve the keys without destroying it.

      • Redezem ( redezem@infosec.pub ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        I dunno man, you can virtualise tpms, and if you can virtualise it, you can lie about it.

        • koper ( koper@feddit.nl ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          You can virtualize a TPM, but you can’t obtain a valid endorsement key.

  • eric5949 ( eric5949@lemmy.cloudaf.site ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    People saying de-google like google isn’t in the position Microsoft was in when they killed Netscape. It’s over y’all, once it’s in chromium it’s the standard, period. The open web is dead.

    Edit: ok, be in denial then.

    • moitoi ( moitoi@feddit.de ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 years ago

      Google isn’t alone in the box. The different governments and states should be in the box with them. It’s not like people warned Google and other corps are a threat to competition and freedom.

      We didn’t see anything coming as antitrust procedure.

      • eric5949 ( eric5949@lemmy.cloudaf.site ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 years ago

        Maybe Europe will do something but I know damn well the us won’t.

  • crunchpaste ( crunchpaste@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Is there anything a person can do about it, other than using Firefox and degoogling?

    • 30isthenew29 ( 30isthenew29@lemm.ee ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      La

  • dontblink ( dontblink@feddit.it ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 years ago

    Can you explain to someone not so tech savy what this means?

    • The Cuuuuube ( Cube6392@beehaw.org ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 years ago

      No more add blockers. No more accessibility tools. Only what google wants you to see.

      • dontblink ( dontblink@feddit.it ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        And this will work for google products only of for chrome as a whole?

        • muhyb ( muhyb@programming.dev ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 years ago

          Only for Chromium based browsers so something like ~80% of worldwide usage. Starting with Google products however also the websites that want to use Google’s codebase, a lot of them. Unless they change it against this development.

        • InFerNo ( InFerNo@lemmy.ml ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 years ago

          A fork like Vivaldi, Brave or Opera could opt not to implement these changes, but then some websites could become incompatible to them.

  • Daurentius578 ( Daurentius578@discuss.tchncs.de ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    from https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/1053748

    https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/wei-wpt-other

    https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/wei-wpt

    these showed up after Jul 21 per GitHub “contribution activity” but are retroactively dated to 13 - they were probably private before that.

    Please comment any information under this post and create cross-links to any possible posts - to create comprehensible information source.

  • starman ( starman@programming.dev ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    What is WEI?

    • Saint of Illusion ( SaintOfIllusion@lemmy.one ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 years ago

      Stands for Web Environment Integrity. Beyond that, I know nothing.

      • 3v1n0 ( 3v1n0@feddit.it ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        3 years ago

        DRM in the web.

        • thumbtack ( thumbtack@beehaw.org ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 years ago

          excuse my ignorance, what is DRM?

          • Litany ( Litany@kbin.social ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            3 years ago

            Digital Rights Management. Usually DRM agreements are imbedded in the terms and conditions no one reads when they install software. It usually gives the software vendor the right to monitor your use of the software in real time via the internet.

            Within the context of Chrome and other Chromium based web browsers, this means that Google will be able to monitor your web browsing in a new way any time you’re using a browser based on Chrome/Chromium.

            • thumbtack ( thumbtack@beehaw.org ) 
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              excuse my ignorance again, but how would monitoring software use in real time be different than how they currently monitor it? what would it really entail? serving more accurate ads and collecting/selling that more invasive type or information?

              i haven’t looked into privacy much prior to joining lemmy, so i’m not very knowledgeable, but i’m very interested in learning more about it.

              • Perfide ( Perfide@reddthat.com ) 
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 years ago

                Not much, which is why this isn’t really a privacy issue. Privacy is already long gone. It’s a control issue.

                Think about how many websites use Google Adsense. With this DRM, Google could force those websites to serve content only to users using chromium, and specifically those without adblockers installed. They’re trying to subjugate the internet.

                • argv_minus_one ( argv_minus_one@beehaw.org ) Banned
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  No force necessary there. Sites will do that on their own, to maximize their ad revenue.

          • brothershamus ( brothershamus@kbin.social ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 years ago

            Digital Rights Management. Code that prevents you from doing what you want with the information you have.

      • starman ( starman@programming.dev ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 years ago

        Thanks.

        • aeternum ( aeternum@kbin.social ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 years ago

          Bascially, at its core, it allows websites to attest that the website shown in the browser is the one given by the server. In principle, this could be a good thing, but in reality, it’s a very very very very very bad thing. Ad blockers will stop working. Accessiblity tools will stop working. At its worst, it will be a requirement to use a website that you only use appoved software and hardware. That means, only chrome, on windows for example. This is a very bad thing. It spells the end for FOSS. Firefox will be as good as dead. I don’t think I’m doomsaying here. I believe this is what will happen.

  • Elw ( Elw@lemmy.sdf.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Shamelessly stolen from the HN thread:

    Don’t just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today: US:

    • https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
    • antitrust@ftc.gov

    EU:

    • https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/contact_en
    • comp-greffe-antitrust@ec.europa.eu

    UK:

    • https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tell-the-cma-about-a-competition…
    • general.enquiries@cma.gov.uk

    India:

    • https://www.cci.gov.in/antitrust/
    • https://www.cci.gov.in/filing/atd

    Email template:

    I would like to bring your attention to Google’s recent proposal to add a feature to its Chrome (Chromium family) of browsers called Web Environment Integrity. This provides a mechanism to reinforce Google’s already dominant browser market position by creating a technological control that can be used to nullify a user’s choice of browser, device and operating system. This technology also has the potential for abuse by preventing users from using browser extensions that can enhance security by blocking unwanted and potentially malicious content, as well as browser extensions that help vulnerable users with enhanced accessibility needs, such as color blindness and visual impairment.
    
    Google’s dominant, near-monopoly position in the browser market already harms me as a consumer by reducing browser choices and preventing a competitive market for developing new browsers. Allowing Google to include this feature will reduce my browser choices and consolidate the browser market even further, and it is incumbent on [INSERT AUTHORITY HERE] to take action against this abusive behavior.
    

Privacy@lemmy.ml

privacy@lemmy.ml

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !privacy@lemmy.ml

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

  • Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
  • Don’t promote proprietary software
  • Try to keep things on topic
  • If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
  • Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
  • Be nice :)

Related communities

  • Lemmy.ml libre_culture
  • Lemmy.ml privatelife
  • Lemmy.ml DeGoogle
  • Lemmy.ca privacy

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 121 users / day
  • 842 users / week
  • 2.94K users / month
  • 6.75K users / 6 months
  • 852 local subscribers
  • 51.1K subscribers
  • 4.55K Posts
  • 59.3K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • k_o_t ( k_o_t@lemmy.ml ) 
  • tmpod ( tmpod@lemmy.pt ) 
  • Yayannick ( Yayannick@lemmy.ml ) 
  • ranok ( ranok@sopuli.xyz ) 
  • BE: 0.19.15
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code