I think a lot of people here don’t understand the danger of this fully and dismiss it with “Just use Firefox, problem solved”.
Unfortunately, once this becomes widely available, that is once Chrome ships it, websites will start to use it.
Maybe Amazon will just not sell to you anymore when you’re browsing with Firefox?
Maybe YouTube wont serve any videos if you’re using Linux?
Your bank will certainly implement this and only allow Windows 11 with Edge or some shit like that.
Once this is implemented, we will all suffer, even if we’re using better alternatives right now.
My brother in Christ, it was 2020 before my bank supported passwords longer than 8 characters. We have 30 or 40 years before we need to worry about the banks.
@xavier666@vaultdweler13, it’s true, For internal use with PCs connected to the central server itself and not to the network, it is used for compatibility with corporate software, sometimes still very old Windows. This, when using it on the one hand only in a specialized way and on the other hand only locally, is more than enough. The same in factories in production for the automation of some valve or machinery with repetitive processes, a super-pc with a NASA OS is not needed.
@xavier666, only if it is used in subsidiaries where they have to manage money movements over the network, but not in local administrative applications where it is irrelevant, as in all purely local uses. In monoapplications in this area, even an old MsDOS will be worth it.
They have traveled to the Moon with an SO from a Tamagochi.
The google SafteyNet Attestation is the precursor to browser DRM. It’s essentially phone DRM.
There are many banks that have apps that require you to pass at least the basic level attestation, if not the CTS profile matching that fails the moment you modify any system level resources, even the bootloader
luckily you can force disable CTS so it falls back on the basic level, for most apps at least. You will never have access to Google or Samsung pay though, as it actually knows your phone model should support CTS and will autofail if it no longer reports that it does.
Alongside that apps like Pokemon GO and Netflix also require at least basic attestation to function - demonstrating the DRM and anticheat capabilities of such a system.
If we lived in a sane country all 4 major tech companies would have already been brought to court over this in like, 2016. (Microsoft for the second time…)
Would apple just roll over on this? Or would they fight to make sure safari is also an option to freely use the internet (or at least severely limiting apples ability to do something similar) And websites that depend on ads, the number of Firefox and safari users have to be greater than the number of users who use ad-blockers. So wouldn’t it negatively affect ad income on websites if they implemented it and cut out all non-chromium browsers?
Technically the idea is that if Chrome has barely any market share (will never happen, but let’s pretend), they cannot implement this as it will anger and lock too many users out of day to day life.
However…
With Google Search and YouTube being by far the most 2 popular websites in the world, I think they still could. The vast majority of people would never give those up and if they’re told to use another program to access them, they absolutely will, meaning in an ideal world with a browser competition, they can easily destroy it immediately.
I think a lot of people here don’t understand the danger of this fully and dismiss it with “Just use Firefox, problem solved”.
Unfortunately, once this becomes widely available, that is once Chrome ships it, websites will start to use it.
Maybe Amazon will just not sell to you anymore when you’re browsing with Firefox?
Maybe YouTube wont serve any videos if you’re using Linux?
Your bank will certainly implement this and only allow Windows 11 with Edge or some shit like that.
Once this is implemented, we will all suffer, even if we’re using better alternatives right now.
My brother in Christ, it was 2020 before my bank supported passwords longer than 8 characters. We have 30 or 40 years before we need to worry about the banks.
Some banks are still running windows 98 internally, admitedly so long as said system isnt connected to the internet it should be fine.
Lol, not to mention Cobalt and other horrors that are lurking in Legacy systems no one has looked at in 50 years.
I’m thinking mainframe terminals, where the character has to be in the right place on the screen in order to store something in RAM.
Even worse, how many systems are still using punch cards? How often do those cards need to be replaced?
You mean Cobol? I’m literally working on migrating legacy cobol code to ODB for a banking client. I’m loving it (/s)
This isn’t true, this can’t be true and I refuse to believe it.
I sincerely hope that your local ATM never crashes and you never have to see the windows xp logo.
@xavier666 @vaultdweler13, it’s true, For internal use with PCs connected to the central server itself and not to the network, it is used for compatibility with corporate software, sometimes still very old Windows. This, when using it on the one hand only in a specialized way and on the other hand only locally, is more than enough. The same in factories in production for the automation of some valve or machinery with repetitive processes, a super-pc with a NASA OS is not needed.
For PCs at workshop, I can understand Win98. The OS is just a bootloader to a single application. But for banking, it’s a terrible security hazard.
@xavier666, only if it is used in subsidiaries where they have to manage money movements over the network, but not in local administrative applications where it is irrelevant, as in all purely local uses. In monoapplications in this area, even an old MsDOS will be worth it.
They have traveled to the Moon with an SO from a Tamagochi.
As long as it’s isolated to local use, I guess it’s fine. But if it connects to the internet, may lord have mercy on the firewall.
Have you ever rooted an android phone?
The google SafteyNet Attestation is the precursor to browser DRM. It’s essentially phone DRM.
There are many banks that have apps that require you to pass at least the basic level attestation, if not the CTS profile matching that fails the moment you modify any system level resources, even the bootloader
luckily you can force disable CTS so it falls back on the basic level, for most apps at least. You will never have access to Google or Samsung pay though, as it actually knows your phone model should support CTS and will autofail if it no longer reports that it does.
Alongside that apps like Pokemon GO and Netflix also require at least basic attestation to function - demonstrating the DRM and anticheat capabilities of such a system.
I wonder if that would be a valid anti trust violition ?
If we lived in a sane country all 4 major tech companies would have already been brought to court over this in like, 2016. (Microsoft for the second time…)
Would apple just roll over on this? Or would they fight to make sure safari is also an option to freely use the internet (or at least severely limiting apples ability to do something similar) And websites that depend on ads, the number of Firefox and safari users have to be greater than the number of users who use ad-blockers. So wouldn’t it negatively affect ad income on websites if they implemented it and cut out all non-chromium browsers?
I think apple would figure out some very creative ways to fuck it’s customers, some more.
It’s IE6 all over again.
Technically the idea is that if Chrome has barely any market share (will never happen, but let’s pretend), they cannot implement this as it will anger and lock too many users out of day to day life.
However…
With Google Search and YouTube being by far the most 2 popular websites in the world, I think they still could. The vast majority of people would never give those up and if they’re told to use another program to access them, they absolutely will, meaning in an ideal world with a browser competition, they can easily destroy it immediately.