Web Environment Integrity: Google's New Attempt to Lock Down Internet

[SactoDoug]

Google is testing code that will add DRM to the entire internet. Web sites will request a token to check it against a 3rd party validator to validate the user. If it is not validated, then the site could reject the user. They could reject users with certain browsers, operating system, Piholes and ad blockers. If implemented it will completely lock down the Internet and make anonymous browsing impossible. The majority of web sites would reject anyone that did not have their ID verified and were on an approved browser, OS etc.

https://github.com/RupertBenWiser/Web-Environment-Integrity/blob/main/explainer.md

3 minute explanation: https://youtu.be/Aj2s3DVSlHw?t=100

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm3gH-ycykw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6r6GhwD4iQ

[Dirtlaw]

What amazes me is the extent almost everyone these days seems to demand reams of personal information as a condition precedent to doing business or interacting. I mean birth date, copies of your driver's license, etc., etc. What next, DNA samples? So, in the name of THEIR security they end up trashing yours.

[OlderThanDirt]

I?m already experiencing websites that won?t allow me to use the site due to VPN and ad blocking. Fook?em.

Wait for the iris scan fun to begin.

[Dirtlaw]

Well I think they figure that, like most youngsters, your are so addicted to the Internet, that you would sign or do anything to keep the thrill alive.

[OlderThanDirt]

A credit card company wanted my wife to verify her identity by sending a picture of her drivers license and a five second video of her face. She told them to go Fook themselves and shove the card up their rectum.

As far as the Internet goes, most people rely on internet access to do simple tasks like pay bills. Walking away from the internet is becoming increasingly difficult. Paper bills aren?t even an option with some companies.

[Cowboy T]

I'm in the world of computer systems engineering, such as large enterprise networks and all that. It's as much a hobby for me as it is an occupation. And even *I* am getting concerned by all this "plugged-in" business. There are certain things that I simply won't do online, e. g. banking. If you never log in, then you don't have an online profile with them, so if my money goes missing, it's on them, not me.

I still write checks to pay bills. Yep, and I'm in the IT business!

There are companies who want your money more than they want to be demagogues. Use those businesses and screw the arrogant companies with that "everyone ELSE has a smartphone, what's YOUR problem, Luddite?" People tell me, "use your smartphone and download our app to do X", I tell 'em, "oh, I don't have one of those." They turn up their noses at me, and I simply smile and walk away...money still in my pocket.

That's what you've got to do, folks. You've got to be willing to just walk away from arrogant jerks like that.

[The Hamsterball]

Whoah. To the OP.

Anonymous browsing was never possible.
Using private browsing does not guarantee anonymity.
An anonymous browsing session just hides and avoids your computer or browser storing website data (specifically cookies).
It does not hide your identity.

Your ISP has your identity along with your cellular service provider.
Whether or not you are using private browsing, on your phone or PC/Laptop, the ISP or cellular provider knows exactly each and every page you have been visiting.
Some things related to App Data (on smartphones), is not viewable by the ISP or Cellular service provider, but still are available to the application developer.

What these videos you posted is stating is false.
These tokens, trackers, or verifiers do not check your identity. They just check if the user accessing their website (through token) is not a BOT and a valid human user.

It has nothing to do with your identity. Most websites do not have access to your identity. I personally run three web domains, and I have no way of accessing the identity of my website visitors.

This token will just confirm you are a human user, and not a BOT attempting to access the website server.

The only people who have access to your identity and surfing habits is your ISP and cellular service provider. And if you're worried about that, nobody can access that data without a subpoena.

Regarding adblockers. There are some e-mail services and websites that do not work with adblockers. Yahoo! mail does not allow running their e-mail service with ad-blockers.
But that has nothing to do with your identity. That just has to do with allowing their service to run ads towards you.

[Reno-Kid]

That sounds like a monopoly and a restraint of free trade. Go at it!

[arrix]

Good luck with that. 90% of the world's websites run on open source software. OSS is the very opposite of DRM. They won't be implementing any sort of DRM into all that.

[ocabj]

I saw this a few weeks ago via official channels and I've held off commenting here. But considering someone just posted a thread in this section of the forum talking about bot traffic to their website, I just wanted to point out that is one legitimate reason for user validation for web traffic.

"DRM" is getting thrown around by all the critics that initially caught on to the Google dev branch and while this is technically possible, people want to assume the worst.

[hermosabeach]

When apple rolled out privacy, Facebook lost billions in lost data.

Looks like Google wants to have full 1984 tracking