And since you won’t be able to modify web pages, it will also mean the end of customization, either for looks (ie. DarkReader, Stylus), conveniance (ie. Tampermonkey) or accessibility.

The community feedback is… interesting to say the least.

  • dan@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    1 year ago

    The point of the proposal is to allow servers to be sure the software (ie browser) running on the device is what it says it is, and take away the ability to spoof what browser you’re running (which is currently fairly trivial).

    So if someone makes a browser that doesn’t allow adblockers and always shows ads, the server can do things like only serve content to that browser.

    • float@feddit.deEnglish
      0·
      1 year ago

      Imho, without hardware support they won’t be able to keep up against the hackers. In the end it’s software and it’s running on hardware outside of the control of the server. There are millions of possible attacks to break/bypass this.

      • dan@lemm.eeEnglish
        0·
        1 year ago

        Problem is the effort to find a vulnerability and exploit it is often higher than the effort required to patch it. Because by its nature a browser and the server it talks to are internet connected, Google will be able to revoke keys for older exploited versions at will. As long as it’s well-engineered I think there’s a good chance they’ll be able to keep that secure.

        Though I’m sure there will be some successful approaches to ad blocking etc but if something like this gains traction it could completely change the internet. If enough people are running browsers like this then sites could effectively be able to kill off competing browsers that aren’t restricted.

        I think the key is to not let it happen in the first place, and boycott browsers that implement stuff like this.