Live data from Hacker News

Firefox bullshit removal

gist.github.com

131–140 of 183 posts

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#131
post #107

To this I would add: middlemouse.contentLoadURL=false This anti-feature means missing the target of a middle-click by a single pixel can leak the contents of your clipboard or load unexpected URLs. I don't understand why it's still on by default -- Mozilla has been willing to break peoples workflow for UI improvements many times before.

> middlemouse.contentLoadURL=false

This is the default in Firefox 57 and later. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366945

> I don't understand why it's still on by default

It's not.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#133

network.websocket.enabled=false This isn't even in my about:config anymore. I'm pretty sure it was at some point. Did they remove the option to disable it for some reason?

It was removed in Firefox 41, once WebSocket had been shipping for a while. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1159792

The only reason the pref was there is that new features tend to have prefs to disable them. First because those are useful for enabling a feature for testing before it may be ready to be on by default, second in case there's a serious problem with the feature that requires it to be turned off in a hurry. But once a feature has been shipping and on by default for a while, prefs to disable it just end up being technical debt, and tend to get removed like any other technical debt when people get a chance.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have worked on products and have made changes based on data I got on how users were using them. Telemetry doesn't replace user feedback or interviews, but it really does help.

I don't believe your personal convenience trumps everyone's right to privacy.

A crash log doesn't violate your privacy, nor does usage statistics when properly anonymized.

Sometimes telemetry is just telemetry.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#135
post #8

"These are used by Mozilla to spy on you, and are as such a significant risk to privacy." Wow that's a big claim. Any proofs that the data collected is not anonymous? It sounds a lot like fear-mongering

They should not be collecting data by default anyway.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#136
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Location is pretty useless. It is based on what address your ISP has in most cases.

On the contrary. Maybe if you're on a hardwired desktop, but for everything else it is incredibly accurate. You don't even need to have GPS in your device -- WiFi is plenty. Try it: https://whereamirightnow.com/ It puts my laptop exactly where I am.

> It puts my laptop exactly where I am.

Did you allow permission for location? Because if you did, it kind of defeats the purpose of showing that disabling this permission helps obscure your location to websites.. On my desktop, it asked for permission, and when denied it threw up its hands and said that it had no idea where I was.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#137

Would have not gotten the backlash it's getting if the author was a bit modest and titled the repo: "How to get rid of FireFox features you don't need", or something like that. Security is an important issue, but as someone who thinks WebRTC is the only missing piece of the puzzle that could help bring true decentralization to the Web, I think bashing on WebRTC just because of its security issue is short sighted. (No…

> I think bashing on WebRTC just because of its security issue is short sighted. (Not to mention a couple other features mentioned on there)

Well, the security concern is real. In other news, bashing on scammers because they scammed someone is short sighted?

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the search engine is unhappy, they will pay less money to be the default.

Then another search engine will happily take the that browser's market share.

Maybe for less money, then your colleagues will get fired and your salary will be cut etc.

Whenever your earnings depends on someone giving you money, whether it's through advertising or a grant, it's quite normal and common you'll be very careful not to upset them. At least you'll think twice before doing so.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary. Maybe if you're on a hardwired desktop, but for everything else it is incredibly accurate. You don't even need to have GPS in your device -- WiFi is plenty. Try it: https://whereamirightnow.com/ It puts my laptop exactly where I am.

> It puts my laptop exactly where I am. Did you allow permission for location? Because if you did, it kind of defeats the purpose of showing that disabling this permission helps obscure your location to websites.. On my desktop, it asked for permission, and when denied it threw up its hands and said that it had no idea where I was.

Yes, of course because the comment I was replying to was about location being worthless in general.

Re: Firefox bullshit removal

#140
I'm puzzled that he sees websockets as a privacy hazard. From what I understand, WS connections are CORS protected (though the model is slightly different than standard CORS for historical reasons) and were designed somwhat friendly to proxies. So what is the problem?

(Though browsers don't seem to honor proxy settings for WS in practice. I guess, this coughs be corrected. Does anyone know the reasons for that?)

WebRTC is more understandable: Connection setup is different for each application, the connection itself is encrypted and browsers don't seem to offer any way to inspect or manage WebRTC flows.

It's sad that a technology which offers so many interesting applications is implemented in such a problematic way for privacy. This should really be improved.

(Warning: rant follows)

Generally, I think we should have a general discussion about the ability of inspecting the network traffic of your own machines. Current practice seems to be that this ability is sacrificed in favor of an "encryption-first" doctrine: Browser vendors are aggressively pushing HTTPS everywhere and it's almost a requirement that new network protocols have built-in encryption. There are still some escape hatches by installing custom root CAs, but programs are starting to circumvent that without much consequences (or even encouragement by OS vendors - e.g. on Android)

For example, right now it's impossible to inspect traffic from the Dropbox client on windows (short of patching the program) because the client ignores custom root CAs. Trying to inspect traffic from a smartphone is already pretty hopeless.

As traffic inspection would be a powerful tool in finding privacy leaks, we should lobby more for it.

Post reply on HN