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.
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.
I’m afraid that browsers supporting this DRM would also block attempts to break it and that browsers that do not support it get blocked by websites using it
I haven’t thought this through, but if you had a headless browser acting as a proxy, couldn’t that pass the un-drm HTML & other resources to your actual browser?
I guess the drm stuff would be embedded in the js so it would have to block all js, so this wouldn’t work for the majority of the modern web.
I think the point is to reduce ad blocker usage among the average person. Techier people will figure out a workaround, and of course the people making botnets will too.
So they’re destroying the open web to squeeze a few extra pennies out of a subset of ad block users.
Yes and no. Yes because the process would work in theory. No because the attestor (supposedly the OS?) wouldn’t attest your “headless proxy browser” as legitimate client.
Using a proxy would move the battlefield to how to trick the attestor. But realistically the whole thing will go down this route anyway. It’s another arms race. At the very end they’ll require cryptographic chips soldered into your device which make sure you’re not sideloading any software before running the OS, which would allow you to trick the legitimate attestor of the OS.