>Everyone should only be allowed to use windows and a chrome browser variant with no ad blocking. Cloudflare 100% should be allowed to arbitrarily block anyone not using this set up because they are suspicious.
Seems like a slippery slope argument, but isn't reflective of reality. They still allow Tor browser to pass, of all things.
>I was using it to show the ridiculousness of blaming a user for the shortcomings of cloudflare.
That doesn't advance the conversation, or show that cloudflare should be always as fault, as you seem to imply. Even if people are pro privacy/freedom, I think most wouldn't give the individual (as opposed to the security provider) unlimited leeway, as seen in the bank example.
It advances the conversation because it refutes the argument that "It's not the users fault" brought up a few comments ago, by using the balaclavas in bank analogy.
Mobile operating systems with remote attestation (that's both Android and iOS) aren't far off from that with regard to native apps. It doesn't affect the web yet, but Google did propose adding an attestation mechanism to Chrome.
I vaguely remember this from this last year though I can't remember all the details. That's a scary slippery slope.
Of course it'll be presented as a security feature, because users are dumb, whilst also allowing vendors to lock you into their ecosystem; similar to how passkeys are currently being push by these same companies.
Seems like a slippery slope argument, but isn't reflective of reality. They still allow Tor browser to pass, of all things.