While WEI is thankfully cancelled, it’s not entirely cancelled… They’re planning on making it available still in WebViews with the intention that websites can check if a malicious Android app is trying to do a phishing scheme.
Seems like such a niche “security” feature… what are they really trying to accomplish here? Something seems fishy to me
A win is when we have forced them to abandon the wretched plan. Them taking it elsewhere with a different name, only to be brought back in the future isn’t a win - it’s more or less the folly the Trojans committed with the Greek wooden horse.
I don’t trust Google’s word that they will keep it that way. Besides, would you have accepted this proposal if WEI wasn’t proposed first? It’s a form of manipulation.
@4censord@dean@rysiek I can see where they could integrate and feature creep to what they really likely want, but in terms of webviews this would likely be beneficial for security.
They want to put it on the default webview in android, which doesn’t seem like a huge deal to me. It would basically let apps that use webview for things like logging in beef up their security.
It’s not like the entire concept of this API was bad, it’s just that with Google’s proposed implementation companies would abuse the fuck out of it to do bad things. Not having it in browsers pretty much eliminates that while still letting things like banking apps enjoy some of the benefits.
Ha, I didn’t know there’s a name for that, but it’s definitely what I assume they’re going to do. My initial reaction was to wonder what they’ll now present as the “reasonable” option to WEI.
Considering they’re rolling it out in Android, maybe they’ll just wait a moment and then integrate it into desktop Chrome as well, just without any of the fanfare?
As someone who uses GrapheneOS but knows very little about the technical side of things, what implications does this have for the OS? I'll actually just not use a smartphone anymore if I'm going to be forced back onto the privacy nightmare that is stock Android.
I’d expect them to support basic integrity. They already do that for apps, so no reason to not expand it. It’d break compatibility.
Since they don’t (want) to offer a way to circumvent the basic integrity check right now, I don’t see why they would undo the expansion into the webview.
They will strip out the DRM part, maybe. GrapheneOS, other than even Firefox or any Linux Distro, has many DRM packages installed. Widevine and lots of others.
So it may be that they dont even remove it from the Vanadium Webview. But if they do, Apps may break as the Developers looove the extra control. And then GrapheneOS needs to do annoying work again, to for example have a sandboxed Webview-DRM app that can be enabled per-App.
Yeah I did that too. Mulch or Vanadium, I would recommend Vanadium. Bromite is dead. Cromite maybe, but really just use Vanadium its the most degoogled and secure one.
But apart from that, the developer options make no sense if there is no way to actually install one without root.
Also, openwebview replaces the installed one, doesnt it?
Yeah I know the projects. GrapheneOS hates F-Droid which is annoying, but I am 100% sure its the more secure and complete OS. DivestOS probably has more user-facing features.
I think every Custom ROM should build on top of GrapheneOS, extend the device list (with worse security but only for some threat models) and add better apps.
Its really shitty, because it could be a better standard for webapps on Linux too. But now we have electron, which is basically compatible with firefox as its web technology
Yes, they provide these Webviews, meaning they get a shitload of work probably, to remove that DRM BS. Until random apps (like all those Playstore apps) stop working on non-DRM webview… yay!
Like, there are already services that just work with apps. If these apps dont work anymore, well…
Obviously this is more of a strategic retreat and nothing else. It’s also a very common tactic to push for something crass, pull back, wait a bit and repeat. Most commonly resistance gets weaker each time, because people are people.
Now if anyone thinks they made money with a retreat and won’t try again, because it’s obviously much more lucrative, which stone exactly are you living under?
You are 100% correct. Nothing is won till you make it impossible for Google to push forward or destroy their motivation for trying again later.
Its a common practice to do exactly that. Just demand something very absurd and let people rage about it, then “step back” to “please the masses” while in reality your “step back” idea is the thing you actually wanted to do from the beginning on. But now people are happy about it.
Agreed, but I disagree about the first part. It being only available in webviews can’t really be abused and makes all the difference. Sure they could try to reintroduce all the bad stuff, even if the had cancelled it altogether, but for now this is a success.
Had to go brush up on what webviews was. you’re right, that really isn’t a big deal For WEI to be implemented on it
Big edit: nope! My original statement was correct, this is going to screw over people who use things like NewPipe, reVanced or Spotube on Android! F*** Google and WEI for Android!
This means that they will implement it, and then it’s only a tiny change to make it available everywhere if they decide to do so later.
The option alone also now also allows people to build stuff that will only work in those WebViews, rejecting to work without the integrity check, which is already a huge loss.
The option alone also now also allows people to build stuff that will only work in those WebViews, rejecting to work without the integrity check, which is already a huge loss.
Can you give a concrete example how this would be a huge issue? A webview is part of an app, which is already a closed system. If a developer wants to, they can already build their app using native UI with integrity checks. Now they can do the same when using webviews. It really has none of the implications it would have for browsers.
He means this builds all the backend and proof of concepts necessary to force it on every other environment, and websites will be prepared for the switch, giving the public that much less time to react when they push it to desktop again
It’s basically “OK, we can’t stop the pushback, so we’ll tell the public it will only work on android web view, but all teams keep working full steam, we’ll wait to merge into the bigger systems until all this dies down, and we won’t have lost any dev time!”
That’s what he wrote in his second paragraph and it’s a fair point. In his third paragraph (the one I quoted) he claims that just having that functionality in webviews is already a “huge loss” though and I was curious what kind of scenario he was thinking of.
You don’t think having to go through all this to stop it again next time, but it’s even harder because it can now be implemented orders of magnitude faster than before, counts as a “huge loss”?
If you are aware of this issue, it is your obligation to tell all of your friends, family, associates and coworkers to stop using Chrome immediately, and try out a new search engine.
It’s the least you can do.
This behaviour by Google is not going to stop. The mask has slipped too many times. They have become the very thing they swore to destroy.
Not many people will be ready to de Google their phones and stop buying their products. It’s the little things that will hurt them the most and show they’ve stepped over a line this last year or so.
For whatever reason I am the least convincing person on earth, and 99% of the time it’s pretty useful shit I’m trying to inform people about and they just want nothing to do with the information. The 1% is when I went full retard and thought GME was going to make me rich instead of much poorer and tried to get others to invest, I’m glad no one listened to me on that one.
That's what Google want you to believe, forget about and step back. It's not over yet. We just stopped the first wave and it will get harder with each wave.
Add comment