Timeline for Is it illegal to access content on website hidden by CSS
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 18, 2019 at 17:29 | comment | added | Trish | one of the most relevant reasons to access the CSS content and override its display look is for blind users that swaps pictures for their descriptor text and removes all formatting brackets. Another might be to get a high contrast display. Both goals are accomplished via a custom Style Sheet that then is displayed or read by the screenreader bar. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 12:47 | comment | added | emory | @Moo I know all browsers interpret css differently. However, if I as a designer successfully "hide" content in chrome but it is visible in IE, then as a I developer I would say IE is broken. I would still have to fix it. As a tech savy person reviewing my code you could probably realize my intent to make content invisible, but would you necessarily realize my intent that the content should not be heard? | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 12:46 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | @emory I understand. Thank You. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 12:41 | comment | added | emory | @KartikSoneji they can argue that they intended it to be viewed a certain way. they can not argue that it must be viewed a certain way. almost certainly they did not specify how they intended it to be heard, felt, or perceived non-visually. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 8:26 | vote | accept | Kartik Soneji | ||
| Mar 16, 2019 at 8:25 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | Then that answers my question. Thanks. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 5:34 | comment | added | user4210 | @KartikSoneji yes they can, what they cannot argue is that it must be viewed in a certain way. The only way to deny that is to not serve the content they want to be hidden. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 5:03 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | So, I take it that the website cannot argue that they intended their website to be viewed a certain way? | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 4:21 | comment | added | user4210 | @emory browsers interpret css differently, it's a nightmare for web developers 😂 | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 4:19 | comment | added | emory | @KartikSoneji it was my understanding that accessibility was one of the goals of CSS. You can (but no one does) provide your browser with user style sheets. You do not have to disable the css b/c you can override it. Technologies like screen readers interpret CSS inconsistently. Some blind patrons may be getting the "paywall content" for free and others not. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 4:19 | comment | added | user4210 | @KartikSoneji Emory is highlighting the fact that when CSS was introduced, the intention of the CSS working group was that a user could decide how a site they are visiting looks, by supplying their own stylesheet. It's just so happened that we've ended up accepting the websites defaults in pretty much all cases and the original intention was forgotten, but it still exists as a capability. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 4:17 | comment | added | user4210 | @KartikSoneji every desktop browser has the option for the user to override every sites stylesheet, or not use any sites stylesheet. The user does not have to use the sites stylesheet at all. CSS is there for styling, it's a suggestion by the website, it's not a legal or technical requirement. You as a user are not beholden to use all or indeed any of the assets a site wants you to use, be it HTML, CSS, JavaScript, images, whatever. This is why adblockers are completely legal. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 4:10 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | @emory Just so you know, CSS was developed so that "different style sheets could describe different presentation for printing, screen-based presentations, and editors". These alternative stylesheets were to be provided by the developers themselves, and not by the end user. While CSS can make the font bigger or change the colors to be more readable, it cannot be used to deliver content in the form of audio or braille. | |
| Mar 16, 2019 at 2:00 | comment | added | emory | @KartikSoneji I think you are plainly wrong about "CSS was never meant to be modified by the end user." I think the original purpose of CSS was that each user provides their own style sheet. For example, a blind person might want all content delivered via audio or via braille and might provide their own style sheet to control how things show up in these alternative media. | |
| Mar 15, 2019 at 23:34 | comment | added | user4210 | @KartikSoneji whether the CSS was intended to be modified is neither here nor there - it can be, readily, and it can even be ignored entirely. CSS is styling, not a security measure by any interpretation of the term - the fact that the website screwed up their security and sent you the full content is their fault, not yours. | |
| S Mar 15, 2019 at 21:41 | history | suggested | Kartik Soneji | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Fixed spelling.
|
| Mar 15, 2019 at 18:50 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | Think of it this way, Suppose I give you a paper to read. Half of the text is written in normal ink and the rest is written in invisible ink. I tell you that you can read the paper, but if you want me to make the invisible ink readable, you have to buy a solution that only I have. But, you discover that if you heat the paper, you can read the invisible ink. Is it illegal to do so without paying me? I could argue that I never wanted you to heat the paper. You could argue that I never forbade you from heating the paper. | |
| Mar 15, 2019 at 18:50 | comment | added | Kartik Soneji | Yes, I agree that protecting content with CSS is almost useless, and can be bypassed easily by the end user, what I was curious about the legality of it. However, CSS was never meant to be modified by the end user. That is not its primary purpose. The site could argue that they never intended for the end user to modify the CSS or look at the source of the page. | |
| Mar 15, 2019 at 18:27 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Mar 15, 2019 at 21:41 | |||||
| Mar 15, 2019 at 17:21 | history | answered | David Siegel | CC BY-SA 4.0 |