>However, officially supported native platform accessibility APIs are NEVER an excuse to remove the autonomy and agency of disabled communities.
I strongly disagree. Being disabled doesn't mean that you should be able to bypass the security of any system.
Also proposals like this help reduce the amount of captchas disabled users get meaning that they may have a better experience using the web if this proposal is accepted.
> Being disabled doesn't mean that you should be able to bypass the security of any system
Correct, but only in the sense that everyone should have the right to bypass attestation checks, not just disabled users.
> proposals like this help reduce the amount of captchas disabled users get
Citation needed. Chrome's implementation of this API ties directly in the Play Integrity API. I am skeptical that style of attestation will have any measurable impact on the ability to automate requests from an Android phone, and I am skeptical that websites will actually reduce captchas rather than just add attestation requirements alongside them.
Even if it did reduce captchas (which to be clear, it probably won't) disability accommodation should not be conditional. Low vision and low mobility users who run custom ROMs also deserve to access the web. If the level of captchas that are thrown in front of low vision users are problematic or inaccessible, that's a conversation we need to have about captchas more generally. It's not an excuse to restrict those users' autonomy over their computers.
I strongly disagree. Being disabled doesn't mean that you should be able to bypass the security of any system.
Also proposals like this help reduce the amount of captchas disabled users get meaning that they may have a better experience using the web if this proposal is accepted.