zlacker

>>christ+(OP)
Absolute worst spec I've ever seen. Google needs to be loaded into a cannon and fired into the sun.

> How does this affect browser modifications and extensions?

> Web Environment Integrity attests the legitimacy of the underlying hardware and software stack, it does not restrict the indicated application’s functionality: E.g. if the browser allows extensions, the user may use extensions; if a browser is modified, the modified browser can still request Web Environment Integrity attestation.

Then what's the point? I can make modified bot browser that commits ad fraud as long as I don't use a rooted Android phone?

I don't believe they're being honest with how this will be used. We need to legally regulate remote attestation.

> As new browsers are introduced, they would need to demonstrate to attesters (a relatively small group) that they pass the bar, but they wouldn't need to convince all the websites in the world.

It speaks for itself. Horrid.

>>jchw+G5
>> I don't believe they're being honest with how this will be used.

Getting browsers to adopt and implement Web Environment Integrity is Step 1.

Step 2 is where all Google web sites start requiring Web Environment Integrity to be used or they lock you out of the site.

Step 3 is where all websites serving Google ads require Web Environment Integrity to be used.

Step 4 Profit!

This is the beginning of the further DRM-ification and enshittification of the Web.

>>thesup+Mn1
No one can control the web unless every personal computing device on earth is closed source down to the hardware. Digital technology is a double edged sword. I agree that Google would definitely want complete control, but they just can’t do that. We’ll most likely rather see deglobalization of the web with trust shifting from FAANG to states.