Before I go full tin foil hat on this theory, I want to know how they plan on making it so the signal is sent client side without the client being able to fake the signal.
Like, this sounds like something that any type of OS that allows you to install a program will be able to bypass quite easily either by always sending the adult signal or never sending the adult signal
Like reading the bill, they explicitly forbid any type of personally identifying information being transferred. It sounds like it’s just a DOB check and if you say you are > 13 or whatever age they have it as it sends a signal.
I’m happy it isn’t allowed to send PII but like at the same time, I feel like just having websites put an age check prompt up does the same thing
So… you know how Battlefield 6 requires Secure Boot and TPM enabled, which just so happens to mean you can only use Windows 11? Yeah, they’ve been priming it for a while. Soon they’ll mandate that the browsers have hooks than can read the attestation of the system like Google’s Safety system on Android, and then sites won’t even load if it doesn’t pass.
So I get what you’re going at, but I did want to add that secure boot doesn’t require Windows 11. And that the main issue with Battlefield 6 isn’t the fact that it has secure boot enabled because you can use Battlefield 6 on Linux with secure boot. The issue is it won’t pass the anti-cheat, which is Javolin if I remember correctly, breaks itself when in a Proton environment.
Being said, I don’t think secure boot is the threat everyone thinks it is. Microsoft was originally not going to let alternative platforms be allowed on the secure boot environment. However, they started facing legal threats regarding it, including a potential ban in Australia and part of the EU stated they were looking into investigating it in regards to anti-trust, so they ended up caving to avoid having a judgment in court. I don’t foresee Microsoft going back to making it so they’re the only one allowed again,and if they do it’s almost certain they’ll be anti-trusted
I can see the concern on a Google attestion style system, but I don’t ever foresee it getting that bad because people will just not use the system. The only reason it’s working somewhat well for Google is because it’s integrated into Android as a whole and practically forced upon developers if they want to use the existing integrity systems. Being said, I’ve only ever seen it in banking apps. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it on a website to website basis.
Before I go full tin foil hat on this theory, I want to know how they plan on making it so the signal is sent client side without the client being able to fake the signal.
Like, this sounds like something that any type of OS that allows you to install a program will be able to bypass quite easily either by always sending the adult signal or never sending the adult signal
Like reading the bill, they explicitly forbid any type of personally identifying information being transferred. It sounds like it’s just a DOB check and if you say you are > 13 or whatever age they have it as it sends a signal.
I’m happy it isn’t allowed to send PII but like at the same time, I feel like just having websites put an age check prompt up does the same thing
So… you know how Battlefield 6 requires Secure Boot and TPM enabled, which just so happens to mean you can only use Windows 11? Yeah, they’ve been priming it for a while. Soon they’ll mandate that the browsers have hooks than can read the attestation of the system like Google’s Safety system on Android, and then sites won’t even load if it doesn’t pass.
So I get what you’re going at, but I did want to add that secure boot doesn’t require Windows 11. And that the main issue with Battlefield 6 isn’t the fact that it has secure boot enabled because you can use Battlefield 6 on Linux with secure boot. The issue is it won’t pass the anti-cheat, which is Javolin if I remember correctly, breaks itself when in a Proton environment.
Being said, I don’t think secure boot is the threat everyone thinks it is. Microsoft was originally not going to let alternative platforms be allowed on the secure boot environment. However, they started facing legal threats regarding it, including a potential ban in Australia and part of the EU stated they were looking into investigating it in regards to anti-trust, so they ended up caving to avoid having a judgment in court. I don’t foresee Microsoft going back to making it so they’re the only one allowed again,and if they do it’s almost certain they’ll be anti-trusted
I can see the concern on a Google attestion style system, but I don’t ever foresee it getting that bad because people will just not use the system. The only reason it’s working somewhat well for Google is because it’s integrated into Android as a whole and practically forced upon developers if they want to use the existing integrity systems. Being said, I’ve only ever seen it in banking apps. I don’t think I’ve ever seen it on a website to website basis.
Secure Boot and TPM are not Windows-only technologies. I’m secure booting openSUSE right now