1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
Torrenting/P2P:
Gaming:
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
looks like rendering adblockers extensions obsolete with manifest-v3 was not enough so now they try to implement DRM into the browser giving the ability to any website to refuse traffic to you if you don't run a complaint browser ( cough...firefox )
here is an article in hacker news since i'm sure they can explain this to you better than i.
and also some github docs
This code will only ever be installed on my machines by force against my will.
No benefit to any users at all, all benefit only to Google and their Advertisers.
I am pirating stuffs. They can't stop me. No other websites can stop me. Piracy sites are not going to use DRM. Firefox + ublock is heaven. Using it even for browsing lemmy as I like the mobile interface better than apps available right now.
Most probably firefox will also bring this or they will lose market share further which is already pretty low.
Question: Firefox renders certain DRM content in containers. Would that be applicable here? (Run unmodified site in container in background, load site content from that to user, and direct the attestor to the container so that the user can modify the site on the front end)?
The point of this is so that the user can't modify the site at all, despite what the proposal might say. Their goals and non-goals are contradictory.
Running this content in a container will not protect you. Just don't even try to adapt to it. Reject it completely.