←back to thread

Unpacking Google’s Web Environment Integrity specification

(vivaldi.com)
756 points dagurp | 4 comments | 26 Jul 23 11:30 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
jfoutz ◴[26 Jul 23 17:59 UTC] No.36882062[source]▶
This kinda seems like a fantastic way to implement micro payments. The site owner sets up a attestor that knows they’ve paid.

I hate Wei in general, but it really could open up control over bots and paid access.

replies(2): >>36882168 #>>36882351 #
1. burkaman ◴[26 Jul 23 18:16 UTC] No.36882351[source]▶
Are you aware of any websites that have tried to implement payments, but failed or chose not to because they couldn't verify which users have paid? It's an incredibly easy problem to solve without WEI.
replies(1): >>36882529 #
2. jfoutz ◴[26 Jul 23 18:26 UTC] No.36882529[source]▶
Yet another username password pair? Yet another credit card entry?

Nah, let jfoutz pay the fraction of a penny and get no ads. Content producer gets paid, and I get to read the article.

The site can choose, based on attested properties to send to an ad network, or just take the money from the user.

There are other ways to do it, but this makes it a standard.

replies(2): >>36882776 #>>36882796 #
3. burkaman ◴[26 Jul 23 18:41 UTC] No.36882776[source]▶
I genuinely am not understanding why you think WEI would make this easier. You have one central place that you log in to set up this payment system, I guess Google in this case, and then other sites check with the central authority to see if you're a paying user. They can use this attestation or a cookie or a Log In With Google button, what's the difference? Either way when you browse from a new device you'll have to log into the payment system again.
4. Ylpertnodi ◴[26 Jul 23 18:42 UTC] No.36882796[source]▶
Standard xkcd standards cartoon inserted here.