this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
530 points (98.4% liked)
Technology
59549 readers
3124 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If its processed locally and sent nowhere, why is this a concern? Unless otherwise.
Edit: I phrased it wrong. If MS claims its processed locally, and is like a second eye, why they would provide an exception to DRM contents. This could mean that some data might get sent to MS servers and transfer of DRM content is banned, this poses a legal risk. Who knows.
Because I absolutely do not trust microsoft to not have some information going back to a server somewhere.
I think you've misunderstood the comment above. They're asking why snapshotting DRM-protected content would be a problem if everything stays local, implying that since it's a problem it does not stay local
Oh yes my bad, brilliant point
Yes.
The non-fun answer is that they're most likely just using the default screenshot mechanism, which already blocks that. Other programs like KeePassXC, which also hides itself from screenshots and recordings (unless allowed) will probably not be included either.
locally until the next automatic update.