Lemmy.zip

2,809 readers
227 users here now

Welcome to Lemmy.zip - a community for like minded people to come and have a chat about almost anything. From games to tech, to anything else, come and have a chat.

If you're new and would like to join Lemmy.zip, please fill in the sign up form. Email verification is required. (Please check your spam folder!)

Once you're signed up, come and introduce yourself in our Home community!

Useful Links

Instance Rules

To maintain the high standard of discourse and interaction we all value, each user must adhere to the guidelines outlined in our Code of Conduct. This set of rules is designed not just to maintain order but also to ensure a safe and inclusive environment for everyone to share their thoughts and ideas.

What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:

If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check out legal.lemmy.zip.

Funding

If you would like to contribute to the upkeep of Lemmy.zip, please head over to OpenCollective.
Anything you're happy to donate is very highly appreciated!
You'll even get your name in the Thank You thread.

Open Collective backers

If you want to use PayPal, you can donate via Ko-Fi:

Server

Uptime

founded 1 year ago
ADMINS
Demigodrick
Sami
ZippyBot
listing: all - local
search
1
528
Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal (github.com)
 
 

Mozilla's position on WEI is pretty solid.

2
117
Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal (github.com)
3
403
Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal (github.com)
4
1085
Mozilla officially opposes Web Enviroment Integrity API (DRM for web pages proposal from Google) (github.com)
5
5
Mozilla officially opposes Web Enviroment Integrity API (DRM for web pages proposal from Google) (github.com)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
3 comments fedilink
6
625
Mozilla Standards Positions Opposes Web Integrity API, [aka googles drm the web stuff from last week] (github.com)
 
 

Mozilla opposes this proposal because it contradicts our principles and vision for the Web.

Any browser, server, or publisher that implements common standards is automatically part of the Web:

Standards themselves aim to avoid assumptions about the underlying hardware or software that might restrict where they can be deployed. This means that no single party decides which form-factors, devices, operating systems, and browsers may access the Web. It gives people more choices, and thus more avenues to overcome personal obstacles to access. Choices in assistive technology, localization, form-factor, and price, combined with thoughtful design of the standards themselves, all permit a wildly diverse group of people to reach the same Web.

Mechanisms that attempt to restrict these choices are harmful to the openness of the Web ecosystem and are not good for users.

Additionally, the use cases listed depend on the ability to “detect non-human traffic” which as described would likely obstruct many existing uses of the Web such as assistive technologies, automatic testing, and archiving & search engine spiders. These depend on tools being able to receive content intended for humans, and then transform, test, index, and summarize that content for humans. The safeguards in the proposal (e.g., “holdback”, or randomly failing to produce an attestation) are unlikely to be effective, and are inadequate to address these concerns.

Detecting fraud and invalid traffic is a challenging problem that we're interested in helping address. However this proposal does not explain how it will make practical progress on the listed use cases, and there are clear downsides to adopting it.

7
461
Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal (github.com)
8
1430
Mozilla opposes Web Integrity API proposal (github.com)
view more: next ›