this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
122 points (95.5% liked)
Technology
59427 readers
2848 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is the best summary I could come up with:
When you tried to access some protected content, a browser supporting the Web Integrity API would first contact a third-party "environment attestation" server, and your computer would have to pass some kind of test.
The company says: "We’ve heard your feedback, and the Web Environment Integrity proposal is no longer being considered by the Chrome team."
Unlike the web version, which would have been a big step "forward" for invasive DRM solutions, Android already has environment attestation, so it doesn't sound like this is doing that much.
If you are Spotify or YouTube, you could already block modified devices at the app level before the embedded WebView even boots up, via the Play Integrity API.
Netflix famously demands preinstallation of Widevine on devices in order to show HD content, and problems with the DRM are a common support issue.
The blog post notes that while Android's WebView system brings "a lot of flexibility... it can be used as a means for fraud and abuse, because it allows app developers to access web content, and intercept or modify user interactions with it.
The original article contains 784 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!