> The way it is now, I can modify web sites using extensions
This isn't related too directly to WASM, what you want is DOM rendering only, you would theoretically reject canvas and WebGL rendering I imagine. But you could create DOM nodes with WASM. The only difference is that WASM is not as easy to decompile, but I can't imagine you're really unminifiying and patching Javascript are you?
Yes, I disabled WebGL many years ago (and Flash many years before that) when I was running Google Chrome. These months, I run Trivalent, which has it and WebGPU disabled by default.
I'm not a web dev, so maybe directing my hatred and resentment at wasm like I did in my first comment is a mistake. I don't like the idea of a site that draws its whole UI to a canvas (for reasons you can probably understand) and I have been assuming that that is impractical in just Javascript and that in practice, wasm is needed for that.
According to one of those services that gives fast answers to questions, Vanadium (the browser of the GrapheneOS project, which I also trust to give security recommendations) has wasm enabled, but that is a new development. Before late 2025, wasm worked only when JavaScript JIT was enabled, and the default was to have it disabled, which is how most users left it. It was possible for the user to enable it only on a few sites chosen by the user (per-site configurability).
I did not mean to broadcast misinformation, and will be more careful in the future. I do know that when the web gets new capabilites to make it a better application-delivery platform, my experience of the web strongly tends to get worse. The introduction of HTML5 and other technologies circa 2006 for example was a very salient example of that.