2046154 - Feature Request: Google Play Integrity seems anti-ownership, anti-user, and proprietary anti-competitive and I suggest you consider a removal
Log In
Log In with GitHub
or
Remember me
Create an Account<br>·<br>Forgot Password
Browse
Advanced Search
New Bug
Reports
Documentation
Please enable JavaScript in your browser to use all the features on this site.
Copy Summary▾
Markdown
Markdown (bug number)
Plain Text
HTML
View ▾
Reset Sections
Expand All Sections
Collapse All Sections
History
JSON
XML
Open
Bug 2046154
Opened 7 days ago<br>Updated 5 hours ago
Feature Request: Google Play Integrity seems anti-ownership, anti-user, and proprietary anti-competitive and I suggest you consider a removal
Summary:
Feature Request: Google Play Integrity seems anti-ownership, anti-user, and proprietary anti-competitive and I suggest you consider a removal
Product:
Firefox for Android
See Open Bugs in This Product
File New Bug in This Product
Watch This Product
Component:
Browser Engine
See Open Bugs in This Component
Recently Fixed Bugs in This Component
File New Bug in This Component
Watch This Component
Version:
Firefox 151
Platform:
Unspecified
Unspecified
Type:
task
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
N/A
Points:
Status:
UNCONFIRMED
Status:
UNCONFIRMED
Mark as Assigned
Milestone:
Project Flags:
a11y-review
Accessibility Severity
Performance Impact
Webcompat Priority
Webcompat Score
Tracking Flags:
Tracking<br>Status
relnote-firefox
firefox152
firefox153
firefox154
Assignee:
Unassigned
Assignee:
Reset Assignee to default
Mentors:
QA Contact:
Reset QA Contact to default
Reporter:
el
Triage Owner:
boek
CC:
19 people
Depends on:
Blocks:
Regressions:
Regressed by:
URL:
See Also:
Alias:
Keywords:
Whiteboard:
QA Whiteboard:
Has STR:
Change Request:
Bug Flags:
sec-bounty
sec-bounty-hof
in-testsuite
qe-verify
Signature:
None
This bug is publicly visible.
Bottom ↓
Tags ▾
Reset
Timeline ▾
Reset
Collapse All
Expand All
Comments Only
Ellie
Reporter
Description
•<br>7 days ago
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:151.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/151.0
Steps to reproduce:
I discovered this: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2015109
Actual results:
Google Play Integrity was added.
This feels harmful for users since
I assume it will make use of these APIs more common, which often prevent installing a custom manually patched Android operating system of the user's choice which harms the very idea of a free operating system and unrestricted device ownership, and
I also assume it will increase dependency on Google services which means even the more anti competitive reliance on the play services, and
as far as I can tell this whole mechanism seems to be deeply closed-source and to potentially even rely on things like TPM or secure enclave or similar that hide things from the user, which is security by obscurity and generally just seems like an all-around bad thing to force upon people. And therefore it shouldn't be added to browsers to not encourage adoption by services people need. TPMs and similar mechanisms should remain an optional feature to empower users, not a way to take away their ownership and choice.
Expected results:
Google Play Integrity probably should be removed from a browser that tries to advocate for the free web. If that makes some services not work, then those services should be encouraged to find other solutions instead.
👍<br>15
👎
🎉
😀
🙁
❤️
BugBot [:suhaib / :marco/ :calixte]
Comment 1
•<br>7 days ago
The Bugbug bot thinks this bug should belong to the 'Firefox for Android::Browser Engine' component, and is moving the bug to that component. Please correct in case you think the bot is wrong.
Component: Untriaged → Browser Engine<br>Product: Firefox → Firefox for Android
Ellie
Reporter
Updated
•<br>7 days ago
Summary: Google Play Integrity is anti-ownership, anti-user, and proprietary anti-competitive and I suggest you consider a removal → Google Play Integrity seems anti-ownership, anti-user, and proprietary anti-competitive and I suggest you consider a removal
Ellie
Reporter
Comment 2
•<br>7 days ago
I would like to clarify that I don't think the browser should offer other kinds of hardware attestation either.
As far as I understand attestation, the main thing that achieves is to lock out people from the open web, and to remove device ownership when the user wishes to modify the operating system in a way that the outside party providing the attestation arbitrarily decided isn't "correct". I'm happy to be corrected, but as far as I know most attestation schemes don't allow the user to simply certify their own hardware and system themselves in an easy manner, if they wish to do so.
👍<br>10
👎
🎉
😀
🙁
❤️
David
Comment 3
•<br>6 days ago
Thank you for filing this, I was about to myself. One small request though: Please remove...