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

  • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    You’re completely wrong.

    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.

    • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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.

      • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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!”

        • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • RandoCalrandian@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            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”?

            • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I almost feel like you’re deliberately trying to misunderstand me now. His third paragraph was talking about how even the option of having this in a webview is in itself an issue and I was asking about that. They are separate points.