Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 450 posts

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#221

Post by morganvachon »

staticelf wrote: post #198

If they do this, I will uninstall Firefox and start recommending some other browser. Mozilla has really sunk in my eyes the last couple of years but this is the final spike in the coffin for me.

What else is there, though, at least for mainstream users? There's Chrome which has been doing this since the beginning for Google, there's Safari but only if you're on a Mac, and there's a smattering of smaller browser projects on Linux that are good in their own right but not mainstream enough to have the features of the big four.

On Windows, Microsoft Edge is of course a lean and capable browser, but the OS itself is also collecting telemetry on you at all times, including browsing habits.

Hopefully someone will fork Firefox for Windows/Mac/'nix and strip out all the telemetry and data gathering bits, otherwise there's not much choice left for a privacy focused, full featured, fully supported browser on all platforms.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#222

Post by stormbrew »

calcifer wrote: post #212
joosters wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are they not letting people decide? If it is not harming anyone's privacy, and they make it clear that it isn't, then what is the problem with letting people opt-in to it? Instead, it's telling that they are choosing to force people to opt-out. They know that their users don't want this, but don't care.

Because opt-in data is inherently biased and is a terrible indicator for common user behaviour.

It would, however, be useful data for the common user behaviour of people who opt in to tracking.

This doesn't really seem unreasonable to me. Obviously part of the inherent cost if not wanting to be tracked is going to be not having your raw user data included in evaluations of what people want.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#223

Post by throw2016 »

Why is Firefox hellbent in reducing any advantage it has over Chrome and becoming an unnecessary clone.

Who runs Mozilla, do they understand why anyone would choose Firefox over Chrome?

Maybe it's time to put a spotlight on the management and decision making structures of increasingly important open source projects like Firefox to ensure they are being run in the public interest.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#224

Post by gbuk2013 »

calcifer wrote: post #213

Can we at least stop with the FUD please? > DRM EME is not DRM, it's a fully open source spec to support third-party DRM modules. If you don't actively choose to install a DRM module, there is no DRM in your Firefox. > 3-rd party apps Like what? Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla. > analytics, tracking So far this has been 100% opt-in. It might change with this new thing, but even that's not for certain.

> Can we at least stop with the FUD please?

Can we please stop with using the word FUD for things that are not? The very idea of accepting DRM as a possibility in the browser was a slap in the face to those who believe in internet freedom.

> Like what? Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla.

Check your facts: it was added to FF 1.5 years before Mozilla bought it. It was an example of them just not giving a shit and adding it anyway.

> So far this has been 100% opt-in.

Check your facts: the Google Analytics in the extensions page that I linked is explicitly "opt-out" and even that happened only because people found out about it and (rightly) raised a stink.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14753546 and https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=697436#c14

(And really, of all the analytics choices, they fucking picked Google Analytics?!)

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#225

Post by Ajedi32 »

keeperofdakeys wrote: post #204
Ajedi32 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The only real issue I can see here are users who have registered their own domain under an eTLD Doesn't the differential privacy system described above prevent even that from being an issue?

I'm not sure if they're planning on collecting every homepage domain here, or just asking something like "Is your homepage domain in the list of top 1000 domains?". In the former case, just having the domain listed could leak information. In the latter case, I can't see any issues.

It's more like: "Is your homepage google.com? Flip a coin, if it's heads tell me the truth, otherwise flip another coin and answer yes if it's heads or no if it's tails." (A bit simplified, but that's the general idea behind differential privacy.)

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#226

Post by Yoric »

BearGoesChirp wrote: post #145
clarkevans wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the burden here is backwards? URLs may contain Protected Health and other Identifying Information. If this data leaks SSL and could be sent to a 3rd party, then it makes Firefox an unsuitable client for a great many applications. EDIT: OK. It's boolean flags (like use of flash) plus an eTLD+1 (example.org; not myname.example.org?). Even so, I believe this tracking should be opt-in with a disclosure screen tha…

do_I_have_very_bad_medical_condition.com Wouldn't that still leak health information? Less overall, but if any is bad, this still isn't acceptable.

Sure, except that with differential privacy, say 5% of telemetry reports would be marked as visiting do_I_have_very_bad_medical_condition.com anyway – regardless of whether they actually did.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#227

Post by joosters »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #219
joosters wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no way of knowing how this may or may not compromise my privacy without a deep understanding of the techniques being used. I am meant to trust Mozilla and hope that they haven't overlooked some weakness in the algorithms used. The obvious security choice is to not add this feature in. The 'Provided this feature doesn't compromise anyone's privacy' is a fantasy, because no-one can be sure of that.

But that's true of _any_ new feature that gets added to Firefox. Anytime you change code, there's a chance you could be creating a new vulnerability that compromises users' privacy or security in some way. If, as some commenters here [have suggested][1], this telemetry would help improve Firefox by significantly reducing the amount of time it takes Mozilla to fix bugs and performance issues in the browser, what makes…

It's obviously far, far more likely in code that is designed to send my browsing habits to a 3rd party (in whatever encoding). Do you not see this, or are you just trying to extend out these arguments to some ridiculous extreme for the sake of it?

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#228

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

calcifer wrote: post #213

Can we at least stop with the FUD please? > DRM EME is not DRM, it's a fully open source spec to support third-party DRM modules. If you don't actively choose to install a DRM module, there is no DRM in your Firefox. > 3-rd party apps Like what? Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla. > analytics, tracking So far this has been 100% opt-in. It might change with this new thing, but even that's not for certain.

> EME is not DRM, it's a fully open source spec to support third-party DRM modules

So, it exists only to facilitate DRM. And I could have sworn that it defaults to enabled?

> Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla

It wasn't when it was added.

>> analytics, tracking

> So far this has been 100% opt-in

Other than the Google Analytics on the add-on pane, maybe.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#229

Post by veeti »

gbuk2013 wrote: post #173
huhtenberg wrote: post #43

The single largest advantage of Firefox over other browsers is that despite all odds and occasional missteps they managed to respect users' desire for complete privacy. For Firefox we want to better understand how people use our product to improve their experience. Sure thing. But the fact that they are unhappy that some (many?) people are opting-out from the data collection is merely a sign that they don't want to u…

> No phoning home. No telemetry, no data collection. No "light" version of the same, no "privacy-respecting" what-have-you. No means No. Nada. Zilch. Try and shovel any of that down people's throats and the idea of Firefox as a user's browser will die. https://github.com/mozilla/addons-frontend/issues/2785 And now this :-( I have been using Firefox since before it was called that. I develop my apps in it, even though…

> DRM

Mozilla fought DRM until the very end and lost. If Firefox is to have any chance at remaining a mainstream browser it needs to support Netflix and the likes. You can't seriously blame them for this, because they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

EME is implemented as unintrusively, securely and privately in Firefox as possible. No DRM is downloaded or run on your computer until you specifically consent to it, and the DRM components run in a sandbox.

Re: Studying how Firefox can collect additional data in a privacy-preserving way

#230

Post by Spivak »

gbuk2013 wrote: post #224
calcifer wrote: post #213

Can we at least stop with the FUD please? > DRM EME is not DRM, it's a fully open source spec to support third-party DRM modules. If you don't actively choose to install a DRM module, there is no DRM in your Firefox. > 3-rd party apps Like what? Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla. > analytics, tracking So far this has been 100% opt-in. It might change with this new thing, but even that's not for certain.

> Can we at least stop with the FUD please? Can we please stop with using the word FUD for things that are not? The very idea of accepting DRM as a possibility in the browser was a slap in the face to those who believe in internet freedom. > Like what? Pocket is fully owned by Mozilla. Check your facts: it was added to FF 1.5 years before Mozilla bought it. It was an example of them just not giving a shit and adding…

Apparently Mozilla has a special deal with Google regarding their use of Analytics but it really doesn't make it that much better.
Post reply on HN