Time to De-Google I guess. I will keep using Firefox and if it when I come across any website pulling this crap I won’t hesitate to blast then till eternity. I suggest everyone else do the same please.
Time was a decade ago… But better now than never.
With that kind of attitude, it’s a wonder no one listened to you a decade ago!
Lol. As soon as I heard someone upload their contacts to Google I thought “welp, I’m out.” And yeah, no one listened then either.
Still, we got diaspora working finally. May the force be with you.
I’ve been converting folks where I can! I work in IT for a huge corporation, so our computers all come pre-loaded with Firefox set as the default browser haha.
And with you!
Damn. How’d you swing that? Everyone I know is still stuck in the Microsoft/Chrome cycle.
I don’t give my users a choice at work and those computers are all locked down to where they’d need an admin to install Chrome.
As far as my personal life goes, I’ve just been the go-to guy for computer questions for friends and family most of my life, so they usually listen to my advice, but it also helps to just go into detail as to why the change is necessary (not recommended, but necessary). No one likes to hear that their web browser is making it impossible to block ads and is streamlining the ad experience so they get more ads. Everyone despises ads lol.
Chad!
I cringe when I remember willingly filling out my contacts list like it was nobody’s business. I’m so sorry, friends and acquaintances. :(
What’s with the hostile attitude?
Boy do I have some news for you if you think that’s hostile
What’s wrong with having a hostile attitude?
I’m just going to stop using sites that implement this tech. Maybe I’ll even make a site and actually contribute to the web with all the free time I’ll have 😇
It’ll be next to impossible when those websites are your bank and Netflix etc.
Not using Netflix is very possible :) Even easier with the pricing they are up to lately.
(But I know you were just listing some examples)
True, but things like banking and e-commerce are another very large part of the things people do on the Internet, and those are more likely to follow along than not.
yarrrrrrr
not sure if you’re talking about sailing there, but my point against Netflix would be that there are definitely more things to do in life than sitting through hours of passive low effort entertainment. it’s very obvious but I guess people are slowly forgetting about that
even gaming is better. at least you’re exercising your brain and motor skills
the banking thing is something else though. but it’s the kind of thing that’s probably done for security anyway, so it’s not that bad and things like that definitely wouldn’t be profitable enough for all this effort Google and others are putting into it 😅
I figured that banks would use it so I have a browser for them and there are alternatives to Netflix that don’t have any drm.
Yarrr 🏴☠️
I’m out of the loop on this one and I’m probably the minority here but big banks would probably incorporate this whole WEI thing but wouldn’t smaller institutions like credit unions opt out? I apologize for my ignorance, I haven’t looked into this at all. This is the first time I’m hearing about WEI and I’m trying to garner some sort of and idea of what it is via comments rather than reading an article about it like a regular human being.
Honestly I am in the same boat, but big banks still make a large portion of the banking system and I don’t why the smaller banks wouldn’t just follow along.
It’s small, but here’s a real actionable item that you can do to help:
Put a gentle “Use Firefox” (or any other non-Chromium-based browser) message on your website. It doesn’t have to be in-your-face, just something small. I’ve taken my own advice and added it to my own website: https://geeklaunch.io/ (Only appears in Chromium-based browsers.)
We can slowly turn the tide, little by little.
Copy and paste:
<p> This site is designed for <a href="https://firefox.com/">Firefox</a>, a web browser that respects your privacy. </p>(I also posted this on the HN discussion.)
Your browser supports Web-DRM. Some features might not be available.
This website does not support browsers that support web-drm
[Cackles in Evil Spanish]
One way to hide it for Firefox users.
<p class="not-firefox-warning"> This site is designed for <a href="https://firefox.com/">Firefox</a>, a web browser that respects your privacy. </p> <style> @-moz-document url-prefix() { .not-firefox-warning { display: none; }} </style>I have a banner on mine as well that I did a couple weeks ago: https://toast.al
De-google, anyone?
How do you “de-google” when most websites expect most browsers to use chromium and start requiring this to ensure
companies buying ad space get the best bang for their bucksecurity?Most websites? Haven’t come across one yet (I am using Firefox on all devices and don’t have any other browser installed) … Do you have any examples?
Yeah I don’t think this comment is accurate, the only website that gives you a subpar experience to incentivize you to use a Chromium-based browser that I’ve come across is, well, google.com on mobile.
Luckily you can download a plugin on Firefox to trick google.com to show you the Chromium experience, or you can just use something like startpage.
That’s true. Luckily I removed Google Search Fixer from my browser this week, as I finally gave up on Google search (hopefully this time it’s permanent).
In my opinion its results have been getting so bad (including boolean searches) in the last months that I feel that other search engines don’t provide a significantly worse experience anymore. I was unable to find content on Google that I know I found there before and where I know that it’s still on the internet, as I was able to find it with other search engines. I actually found that for example Bing gave me much more results when filtering by date range, e. g. searching for web content dated before 2005.
Google’s web DRM project was the final straw for me to finally be serious about trying other search engines again (all my previous attempts eventually failed due to my boolean search requirement) and use as little Google services as possible. I have also tried to lower my usage of YouTube over the last couple of months by primarily subscribing to channels I know from YouTube on PeerTube and by using the Piped frontend more. Since I subscribed to YouTube channels via RSS already, it wasn’t difficult to switch the RSS feed over to PeerTube instead. ;)
For me, when a website doesn’t work in Firefox but does in Chrome or edge, most of the time the real reason is due to me switching from a browser with dozens of add-ons to one with 0.
Otherwise Firefox works fine everywhere.
Not yet, this is what this change enables. This is just starting now.
Google search on FF Android, Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, Snapchat web, are all apps that have missing features on Firefox or straight up don’t work.
Snapchat web client doesn’t work on Firefox :( that’s the only one I’ve run into
Firefox and ublock origin to start. Site requires Chromium? Buh bye now.
Good luck with that when the site is your bank, your doctor, or your government.
I’ve been de-Googled for 6 months now and the internet works just fine on Firefox and Safari. No significant differences.
For now. This is a near-future thing.
That’s fine, they’ll lose my traffic.
So many people are acting like they have no choice, like you absolutely have to have everything that everyone else has. You’re obligated to use such and such platform.
Try suffering for what you believe in over convenience for a bit. Things might just change if you give up some things because they’re shit
I agree it is an uphill battle, but it must start somewhere. Else, it only gets worse, and then movements against such abuses will get easily crushed. As I like to say, “the hardest part of a journey is the first step”, but also “the future belongs to those who prepare now”.
If I can’t internet without ads, I can’t internet at all.
Except it’s practically impossible to exist in modern society without internet. Unless you’re rich and you can get other people to do internet-requiring tasks for you.
We do to google what we should have done to Microsoft: we stop visiting those sights
I can count the websites I’m using that don’t work with Firefox on one hand.
I like AOSP based roms (Monet and material you) and Pixel Launcher, I use (a bit Google Assistant) and Gmail, Google maps, YouTube… Even Chrome (and I’m pretty sure many macOS apps are Chromium based), how do I even start lol.
There are AOSP based roms that are de-googled. You can use third party app stores to download foss software, or other 3rd party stores that let you download from Google play (aurora). iPhone is basically the only other choice, but it’s not any better in this context.
Lots of alternative email providers. Protonmail is one.
For maps, openstreetmap exists. You can also use Google maps without an account inside a secure browser. That will minimize data collection.
You can use a downloader (yt-dlp or a gui that wraps it) for YouTube, or use a 3rd party app like NewPipe. Again, using YouTube without an account in a secure browser is an option.
Chrome can obviously be replaced with Firefox/LibreWolf. If you must have a chromium based browser, you can use ungoogled chromium. chrlauncher is a small app that can be used to make it easy on windows and keep it updated.
You cant really do anything about the apps that use chromium internally for rendering, besides finding replacements.
I haven’t been able to use aurora reliably since a lot of their accounts got banned. Are there any alternatives?
Hacker News discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36876301
That’s bleak
IE in the 2000’s called, it wants it’s dream back.
Between this, hobbling adblockers and performing enough monopolistic acts to warrant swift government action, I really see this more as Chrome dying than the web itself.
Breakup Alphabet. It’s the only way.
Microsoft, Facebook, and Amazon next
Honestly this won’t effect me a ton, though I wouldn’t be surprised if I have to boot up a windows virtual machine just to check my bank in a few years cause my bank doesn’t know what Linux is and doesn’t want go trust it. I’m mad about it but given slowly but surely I’ve been replacing everything with FOSS stuff. I just fear one day they will force you to use corpo approved software to use WiFi , or get cell service
It will likely not work inside a VM. Haven’t looked into the implementation, but they will probably want to use the hardware DRM manufacturers have been sneaking into the CPUs and GPUs.
So you will be required to use “approved” CPU, “approved” OS and “approved” browser to access certain websites, as it is already the case with online streaming. You can kiss foss goodbye.
Entirely separate laptop purely for those annoying sites it is, then. At least until the approval inevitably gets cracked and can be bypassed.
Pass a vTPU maybe it will
Just keep dropping Google shit and recommending to others.Critical mass will be hit at some point. There are too many smart and capable people in the world to succumb to a Google world.
ELI5 Anyone?
You will use the web as google said or you won’t use it at all.
Google is underestimating my ability to drink all day and forget the internet entirely.
Ah but what you don’t remember is when you’re drunk you go on the Internet and stumble around and talk incoherently
What you even do you mean that?
When you’re drunk you don’t remember using the Internet
Until you do, and die of anxiety.
If you don’t check what you wrote it doesn’t exist, right? Right?
How to kill 3% of your userbase: implement DRM
Sadly likely close to the truth…
But this is the 3% that sets trends. I am sure most of us were biggest google simps 10-15 years ago… no so nowadays.
Maps and youtube are only products i have not kicked… yet
I suggest using invidious if you’re gonna use YouTube
YouTube is on teevee… No solution for that as far as I know.
I just pay to avoid ads
When they add three strikes to AdBlock for Google, I’ll probably drop that too. Or I’ll try as it’s the only video platform.
DRM for the web.
Basically, if your browser modifies a web page in any way (such as by blocking ads, applying a theme, disabling javascript, whatever), the server wouldl be able to detect this and deny access.
This sound scaring, but we have been working around DRM shit since it’s invention if I recall… Should we still be alarmed?
Yes absolutely. Your hardware has built in DRM capabilities. Modern CPUs basically have a 2nd small CPU inside that runs proprietary code and manages the primary CPU, and it also handles DRM.
That isn’t something you can easily work around.
Google is pushing some bullshit that would allow websites to check if a client (you, your browser, your device) is on the okie-dokey list. If yes, you may enter e. g. Youtube, if not the you’re out. It’s like a bouncer for websites and of course Google would be that bouncer. So you might stand out in the rain if you are using one of the following:
-
VPN
-
Adblock
-
Non-Chromium browser like Firefox
At that point they will just have the Google internet and either you’re in it or you are not.
They’re trying to be the new AOL I guess.
-
WEI checks your browser, your extensions and your OS to ensure that a site is not tampered with. Officially it’s to make sure that sites don’t have to deal as much with bots.
Too bad that many of us use adblockers to protect us from malicious ads or remove ads to make a website bearable. Google also happens to distribute ads which makes the fact that adblockers likely won’t work anymore a very concenient coincidence they totally didn’t have in mind.
It’s also possible that non-Chromium browsers (for example Firefox) will stop working due to them either not supporting WEI or not being considered legitimate by whoever will do the checks.
It is also completely contrary to the whole concept of html web design where the browser has complete control over fonts, spacing, discreet content display, etc, so that each user can consume the content in a way that works for them.
your user name 🤣
I’m always watching.
Basically drop „don’t be evil“, split to Alphabet, wait a few years, be evil
laughs maniacally in money
This video by Louis Rossman is a pretty good explainer https://yewtu.be/watch?v=0i0Ho-x7s_U
So this is a problem for all browsers based on Chromium right???
No, it is a problem for all browsers, present and future, period.
The point is that major websites, even government ones might decide to be only available on Chrome.
So much for internet freedom…
deleted by creator
Is there anything a person can do about it, other than using Firefox and degoogling?
La
Can you explain to someone not so tech savy what this means?
No more add blockers. No more accessibility tools. Only what google wants you to see.
And this will work for google products only of for chrome as a whole?
Only for Chromium based browsers so something like ~80% of worldwide usage. Starting with Google products however also the websites that want to use Google’s codebase, a lot of them. Unless they change it against this development.
A fork like Vivaldi, Brave or Opera could opt not to implement these changes, but then some websites could become incompatible to them.
A fork like Vivaldi, Brave or Opera could opt not to implement these changes
It doesn’t quite work like that. They wouldn’t choose to not implement the change, because the change comes from upstream via Chromium. They would have to choose to remove the feature which, depending on how it’s integrated, could be just as much work as implementing it (or more, if Google wants to be difficult on purpose). Not implementing the change is zero effort; removing the upstream code is a lot of effort.
It depends on how Google wants to play this. If they require website operators to use WEI in order to serve ads from Google’s ad network (a real possibility), then suddenly 98.8% of websites that have advertising, and 49.5% of all websites would be unusable unless you’re using Chrome. It’s probably safe to assume they’d also apply this to their own products, which means YouTube, Gmail, Drive/Docs, all of which have large userbases. The spec allows denying attestation if they don’t like your browser, but also if they don’t like your OS. They could effectively disallow LineageOS and all Android derivatives, not just browser alternatives.
Question for anyone with more understanding of the implementation…
Doesn’t this still presume the browser tells the truth to the third party attester? Could we not build something that just straight up lies to the attester? Says I’m a good Google chrome user with no extensions please serve me ads sir?
My understanding was that the browser vendor itself would be the attester. So if Google says it’s Google Chrome, it probably is. Unless you somehow reverse engineer how Google decides that it’s Google Chrome and spoof that or something…
What is WEI?
Stands for Web Environment Integrity. Beyond that, I know nothing.
DRM in the web.
excuse my ignorance, what is DRM?
Digital Rights Management. Usually DRM agreements are imbedded in the terms and conditions no one reads when they install software. It usually gives the software vendor the right to monitor your use of the software in real time via the internet.
Within the context of Chrome and other Chromium based web browsers, this means that Google will be able to monitor your web browsing in a new way any time you’re using a browser based on Chrome/Chromium.
Within the context of Chrome and other Chromium based web browsers, this means that Google will be able to monitor your web browsing in a new way any time you’re using a browser based on Chrome/Chromium.
With only slight hyperbole, we can say that Google can do this monitoring already.
What’s worse, is now they can:
- Refuse you access to information by refusing to attest your environment.
- Restrict your browser, extensions, and operating system setup by refusing attestation.
- Potentially bring litigation against you for attempting to circumvent DRM (in the USA it’s illegal to bypass DRM).
- Leverage their ad network to require web site operators to use attestation if they wish to serve ads via Google. AKA force you to use Chrome to use big websites.
- Derank search results for sites that are not using attestation.
In my opinion, the least harmful part of this is the ability to monitor page access, because they can more or less do this for Chrome users anyway. What’s really harmful here is the potential to restrict access to and destroy practically the entirety of the internet.
excuse my ignorance again, but how would monitoring software use in real time be different than how they currently monitor it? what would it really entail? serving more accurate ads and collecting/selling that more invasive type or information?
i haven’t looked into privacy much prior to joining lemmy, so i’m not very knowledgeable, but i’m very interested in learning more about it.
Not much, which is why this isn’t really a privacy issue. It’s a control issue.
Think about how many websites use Google Adsense. With this DRM, Google could force those websites to serve content only to users using chromium, and specifically those without adblockers installed. They’re trying to subjugate the internet.
Digital Rights Management. Code that prevents you from doing what you want with the information you have.
Thanks.
Bascially, at its core, it allows websites to attest that the website shown in the browser is the one given by the server. In principle, this could be a good thing, but in reality, it’s a very very very very very bad thing. Ad blockers will stop working. Accessiblity tools will stop working. At its worst, it will be a requirement to use a website that you only use appoved software and hardware. That means, only chrome, on windows for example. This is a very bad thing. It spells the end for FOSS. Firefox will be as good as dead. I don’t think I’m doomsaying here. I believe this is what will happen.
from https://discuss.tchncs.de/post/1053748
https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/wei-wpt-other
https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/wei-wpt
these showed up after Jul 21 per GitHub “contribution activity” but are retroactively dated to 13 - they were probably private before that.
Please comment any information under this post and create cross-links to any possible posts - to create comprehensible information source.
Shamelessly stolen from the HN thread:
Don’t just comment and complain, contact your antitrust authority today: US:
EU:
UK:
India:
Email template:
I would like to bring your attention to Google’s recent proposal to add a feature to its Chrome (Chromium family) of browsers called Web Environment Integrity. This provides a mechanism to reinforce Google’s already dominant browser market position by creating a technological control that can be used to nullify a user’s choice of browser, device and operating system. This technology also has the potential for abuse by preventing users from using browser extensions that can enhance security by blocking unwanted and potentially malicious content, as well as browser extensions that help vulnerable users with enhanced accessibility needs, such as color blindness and visual impairment. Google’s dominant, near-monopoly position in the browser market already harms me as a consumer by reducing browser choices and preventing a competitive market for developing new browsers. Allowing Google to include this feature will reduce my browser choices and consolidate the browser market even further, and it is incumbent on [INSERT AUTHORITY HERE] to take action against this abusive behavior.People saying de-google like google isn’t in the position Microsoft was in when they killed Netscape. It’s over y’all, once it’s in chromium it’s the standard, period. The open web is dead.
Get out of here with that defeatist attitude lol. There’s this little browser called Firefox. They take privacy and ad-blocking very seriously, and the browser is excellent and faster than Chrome now.
I made the switch about six months ago and never looked back, and I am deep in the Googlesphere.
Isn’t the issue that the website will go through with this and firefox has to either comply or just not be able to view the webpage?
Chrome has enough of the marketshare that websites probably don’t have to be concerned with whether firefox can support them or not.
Incorrect. Some companies supported IE5 when we had IE8 because market share was greater than 5%. We need to get Firefox to above 5%, and keep going to 10% and 15% as a real middle finger to say, DON’T EVEN TRY OR YOU WILL LOSE MONEY!
…the example is some companies supported Internet Explorer 5 when it had a market share of 5% vs… Internet Explorer 8
…so what was Netscape Navigator’s marketshare at the time?
It is irrelevant to the point. The point is companies won’t implement webDRM if their firefox userbase is too big and it’s going to cost them money and users. If Firefox is used by 10% of users, the decision to implement it would potentially cost 10% revenue.
I’m highlighting how companies make these decisions and how this can kill WEI.
Okay, so here’s why it’s not irrelevant:
IE5 is still IE. Microsoft has an obligation to make it look good (so dumb users don’t bunk newer versions in with it) and browers have the same issue (Well i’m using the internet explorer so why isn’t it working?)
This same perception (which I can absolutely assure you as someone who has supported older users does happen) Is not a perception that happens with different products altogether. If you’re using Netscape, they’d just tell you to use IE. If you’re using Firefox, they’d just tell you it was made with “Google” in mind.
Using an example where the two products are in fact different versions of the same product is a significant difference.
But still in regards to the argument about revenue, the gaming market is constantly showing that companies will definitely implement DRM under the assumption that it is providing them revenue, even if they lose customers because of it.
Gaming is very different. Losing a battle with DRM on gaming does not mean losing it on the web is a certainty. People can still choose DRMless games, and GOG is still going so it’s not a lost battle.
I know IE5 and IE8 are the same browser, I’m saying that company support decisions are made on market share and revenue. Any browser over x% is a supported browser. Over y%, it’s a partially supported browser. We need to make Firefox a supported browser through market share.
A retail website will not implement something that will cost them traffic, because they’ll lose more than they gain. My biggest concern is the first movers will be the streaming giants, and it’s probably a case, that people need to take a stand here, and cancel subscriptions if they get blocked, but it won’t even be coded if it costs more than it gains. They aren’t going to sacrifice 10% of their revenues, if they don’t gain more. This project will fail if no website supports it. The mission is to ensure websites don’t support it and it dies. If Chrome market share dies in the process, awesome.
It. Doesn’t. Matter. What. Firefox. Does. What part of google controls 3/4 of the web don’t you understand? If google puts it in Firefox has no choice, do it too or die.
“Google controls 3/4 of the web, so not only am I going to roll over and take it, but I’m going to lube myself up for their convenience.”
FTFY
Moving to firefox would still be rolling over and taking it though. If they don’t comply, you just don’t have permission to view the web page. It’s not like they’re going to go around that in any way.
Unless you find an alternative to the website itself you’re out of options.
The only ways of “not taking it” that I would see are either you find a way to ignore the DRM and view the site anyway, or you make the site drop the implementation, neither of which switching to Firefox does.
Or just don’t visit websites that have DRM. Any website willing to work with Google on this DRM thing is a website I have zero desire to ever visit.
That kindof argument is just naïve bordering obnoxious. It’s like an ostrich putting their head into the ground.
It’s going to spread, more sites will use that DRM, and even if you decide you can keep off of them on principle, most people won’t.
If it were remotely going to end up that way we wouldn’t have chrome being able to do this to begin with
It makes it more expensive to implement the DRM. Companies always consider things in terms of return on investment. If implmenting it gains x, but loses y% share of users, they will weigh it up, the more %ge of users on Firefox, the more it will cost and the less likely companies are to roll this out.
I mean…have you seen the gaming market on DRM? People point to arguments and research that it doesn’t even work and it still gets implemented in the AAA games…Firefox is going to need a lot more than outrage to build a share that threatens that.
DRM in games exists because their market accepts that. There is no real opposition. They already shed the people that cared about that. They can make more money from the DRM and extra stuff. This isn’t clear in browsers.
As for AAA, it’s dead to many, and indie game dev is getting stronger and stronger.
Oh fuck you.
Oh great, now you’re getting emotional.
You aren’t providing reasonable criticism to the argument. It’s completely unrealistic and ignoring how we got here to begin with.
He’s right to respond emotional when you just make a completely unrealistic argument.
Well then it’s back to non-commercial platforms like here in the fediverse. The people who care about this stuff will find a way and those who don’t won’t care. Its more or less like in the days of the old web.
It will because companies generally support anything above 5% otherwise they’re damaging revenue. Everyone needs to move to FF ASAP and don’t look back. Get all your friends and family on firefox.
Unfortunately this little browser called Firefox has an insignificant amount of user share and pretty much no say in anything. While they might take privacy and ad blocking very seriously, they don’t take feedback and their users seriously at all, being very aimed at the “let’s make our userbase even smaller” after each decision or change.
Also, Firefox is only faster than Chrome on synthetic tests on Windows 10, not reflecting real world usage in any shape or form, and on Android it’s just comically slower than any other browser available.
And as a disclaimer, I’m a Firefox user for ever 10 years now, but I fully understand that while we might win some battles here or there, the war is already lost and it’s only a matter of time now. I’m also getting really tired of all the upkeep Firefox demands of me to be usable by my standards and all of Mozilla’s shenanigans.
Based on your the start of your post, I find it very hard to believe you actually use Firefox.
One of those: “Firefox is sooooo bad, but trust me, I use it”.
The war isn’t lost, and we need to get everyone using Firefox, it just seems that you are contributing to Google’s mission. It’s a bit like saying “as a Ukrainian, we are already lost, let’s give up”. “No, thanks, we won’t”. We gonna kill this thing like AMP.
and on Android it’s just comically slower than any other browser available.
When’s the last time you used it? I just did a comparison against Chrome on multiple different websites, and besides Googles own sites they were essentially equal. Even if it were slightly slower, I’d still use it over any other option since I have full fat ublock origin installed on it.
When’s the last time you used it?
I use it every day to browse Kbin, the only extension I have is Greasemonkey with KES and Redirect Amp to HTML scripts. My adblocking is done via NextDNS for a system wide blocking. For everything else I use Samsung Internet, and now I’m trying out Vivaldi, and the difference is astounding. Firefox takes at least 10 seconds to start loading any page, it lags to a halt when scrolling and it constantly thinks I’m trying to pull to refresh (yes I know it can be disabled).
I don’t know what to tell you, then. I don’t have any of those issues now. It’s been probably a good two years since I’ve had loading speed issues, never had the scrolling issues, and only had issues with the pull refresh when it first launched in Nightly.
We all know this is true because browser user share never changes over time based on user experience or anything.
Google isn’t alone in the box. The different governments and states should be in the box with them. It’s not like people warned Google and other corps are a threat to competition and freedom.
We didn’t see anything coming as antitrust procedure.
Maybe Europe will do something but I know damn well the us won’t.
HEY WHY DID YOU DELETE YOUR COMMENT?!
