But how it’s implemented means everything. Google’s play integrity is corrupting because it’s designed to lock vendors in to Google’s proprietary ecosystem. You’re not getting that from this ‘language’ alone, it could be the case but it’s a massive leap at this point.
I do not care if it is connected to proprietary ecosystem or not. The freedom to decide what software am I allowed to run on my PC is important for me though. Any system that limits that freedom is evil by definition.
if unprivileged software can ask the integrity verifier component which private key is used as the integrity root, or what rules does the verifier keep, then it can be used by commercial software (and web browsers) to decide whether they allow running themselves on your computer (or whether you are allowed to watch netflix, or log in to the bank’s or the government’s website)
I do not understand where does your optimism come from? In what little that we do know they describe the exact same system using the exact same wording as google. If they mean some other thing then they should spend a couple of hours and describe how is it different. And before that the worst should be assumed. It is to dangerous to treat it in any other way.
I don’t like to ever assume negative intent without good evidence. I think I’m taking the neutral rather than optimistic view here. If you want me to speculate whether this new company is good or evil, that would just be my speculation; it would depend how they intend to make money out of it, from my gut instinct I can’t say they give me any specific Google vibes yet.
It’s not about the google vibes, it’s that this thing could be standardized and used by several programs and websites.
here’s an example. with google’s integrity system, most phones can not go through attestation. an exception is phones that can run GrapheneOS. but for apps that require attestation, the developers need to change their app so that it accepts valid attestations of systems that use the GrapheneOS key. such apps can decide to keep only accepting google approved systems.
so far it looks like this will work similarly enough that software you run will be able to be picky about what distribution you use.
But how it’s implemented means everything. Google’s play integrity is corrupting because it’s designed to lock vendors in to Google’s proprietary ecosystem. You’re not getting that from this ‘language’ alone, it could be the case but it’s a massive leap at this point.
I do not care if it is connected to proprietary ecosystem or not. The freedom to decide what software am I allowed to run on my PC is important for me though. Any system that limits that freedom is evil by definition.
I’m right with you there, and it’s proprietary software that threatens that, nothing included in this announcement does though.
if unprivileged software can ask the integrity verifier component which private key is used as the integrity root, or what rules does the verifier keep, then it can be used by commercial software (and web browsers) to decide whether they allow running themselves on your computer (or whether you are allowed to watch netflix, or log in to the bank’s or the government’s website)
I do not understand where does your optimism come from? In what little that we do know they describe the exact same system using the exact same wording as google. If they mean some other thing then they should spend a couple of hours and describe how is it different. And before that the worst should be assumed. It is to dangerous to treat it in any other way.
I don’t like to ever assume negative intent without good evidence. I think I’m taking the neutral rather than optimistic view here. If you want me to speculate whether this new company is good or evil, that would just be my speculation; it would depend how they intend to make money out of it, from my gut instinct I can’t say they give me any specific Google vibes yet.
It’s not about the google vibes, it’s that this thing could be standardized and used by several programs and websites.
here’s an example. with google’s integrity system, most phones can not go through attestation. an exception is phones that can run GrapheneOS. but for apps that require attestation, the developers need to change their app so that it accepts valid attestations of systems that use the GrapheneOS key. such apps can decide to keep only accepting google approved systems.
so far it looks like this will work similarly enough that software you run will be able to be picky about what distribution you use.
The intention barely matters. It’s opensource, someone else can do the evil thing.
No. Google’s attestation code is FOSS too.