this post was submitted on 25 Jul 2023
1436 points (100.0% liked)

Firefox

17857 readers
39 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 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.

[–] rainh@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 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?

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] rainh@kbin.social 6 points 1 year 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.

[–] conciselyverbose@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

It's literallly impossible for there to be a valid reason for a website to be entitled to know that under any circumstances.

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Whirlybird@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well with custom roms they already are for many apps.

[–] DarkThoughts@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

True, but that's within their own ecosystem. The internet is not owned by Google. But I guess a certain part of the majority wants it that way with how popular Chromium based browsers are.

[–] whatsarefoogee@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year 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.