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

Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

12bytes.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 125 posts

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#11

Post by lucideer »

feelin_googley wrote: post #5

An opinion: The most serious threats to user privacy from advertising companies are the "features" of the browser that allow data to be sent to or from the users computer without any input from the user . In other words, the features that let developers of websites trigger GET and POST, to "push" media to the users computer and allowing "pulling" user data indiscrinately, without explicit consent and sometimes withou…

This is a great post, and is exactly the line I've been thinking along for a long time.

I currently use uMatrix for this and it implements this almost perfectly. However, it's scope is too narrow: it only controls requests within the webpage, so doesn't have access to it many requests the browser will make outside of that scope.

If you start by broadening the scope from webpage to browser, you eventually get to the operating system level, at which point we're really just talking about a firewall/proxy tool with granular control. I've used things like privoxy and proxomitron for this in the past; little snitch is the best I've used in terms of UX and control, but it's still nowhere near as good as the uMatrix interface.

There are a number of challenges with making such a tool, the primary two being: (1) mitming secure connections, (2) contextual control, differentiating iframe, js, css, image, etc. requests becomes more difficult once you're working at a global level.

Given these limitations, uMatrix in combination with a good, strict about:config that allows granular control over everything may be the best we can ask for in the short term.

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#12

Post by milofeynman »

sohkamyung wrote: post #6

One thing not mentioned in the list is Firefox Multi-Account Containers [1]. It helps by segregating your on-line information (cookies) into separate containers that you set up. It doesn't stop sites pulling all cookies, but it reduces the amount of information being sent: only the information in the same container is accessible. [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

There is a new config in Firefox under privacy.firstpartyisolation that is similar. But I can't use it or the various referer about:configs with my work mac because they break JIRA.

First party isolation was made for Tor and privacy and keeps all cookies in containers in some fashion.

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#13

Post by Nux »

Why are those concerned with privacy "freaks", but those concerned about performance "buffs"? As a person who cares about privacy I find this a bit offensive and it's not helping the privacy debate.

Nice article otherwise and I have to congratulate the web designer - what a beautiful, readable site!

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#14

Post by genghizkhan »

For the user.js bit, I prefer pyllyukko's relaxed branch[1]. I've got a setup quite close to it[2] and it works very well with next to no breakage.

Also, using both uBlock Origin and uMatrix is somewhat redundant. Gorhill himself has advocated using per-domain permissions in uMatrix and not having different settings for each element type in uMatrix (if I remember correctly, I can't be bothered to look up the source right now) which is easily done in uBlock Origin using Advanced Mode. One can also replace Neat URL and Skip Redirect with Request Control[3], which is a more flexible solution, imo, though it requires one make their own rules.

[1] https://github.com/pyllyukko/user.js/tree/relaxed

[2] https://github.com/savyajha/dotfiles/blob/master/Firefox/use...

[3] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/requestcontro...

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#15

Post by acqq »

sohkamyung wrote: post #6

One thing not mentioned in the list is Firefox Multi-Account Containers [1]. It helps by segregating your on-line information (cookies) into separate containers that you set up. It doesn't stop sites pulling all cookies, but it reduces the amount of information being sent: only the information in the same container is accessible. [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

And what you don‘t mention is that that privacy extenson now also has more telemetry. Sad.

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#16

Post by Hextinium »

FullMetalBitch wrote: post #10
peterwwillis wrote: post #9

Privacy used to be a hobby for people with tinfoil hats or the monicker 'cypherpunk', but soon even Grandma will be going through a key signing ritual while muttering something about a return to the gold standard.

It's actually sad how so many people don't care about their privacy, sure you can give a little but it should be an option not mandatory and in many aspects it is mandatory or done without the person knowledge. The least thing they could do is ask for it... Edit: I shouldn't write early in the morning, tons of grammar mistakes.

I am consistently surprised why this isn't a bigger deal giving the gravity of what is happening. I see news headlining all the time for very transient things but have yet to see an easily accessible version that I could hand my mother of why privacy is so important if anyone could show me one I would greatly appreciate it

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#17

Post by cinquemb »

lucideer wrote: post #11
feelin_googley wrote: post #5

An opinion: The most serious threats to user privacy from advertising companies are the "features" of the browser that allow data to be sent to or from the users computer without any input from the user . In other words, the features that let developers of websites trigger GET and POST, to "push" media to the users computer and allowing "pulling" user data indiscrinately, without explicit consent and sometimes withou…

This is a great post, and is exactly the line I've been thinking along for a long time. I currently use uMatrix for this and it implements this almost perfectly. However, it's scope is too narrow: it only controls requests within the webpage, so doesn't have access to it many requests the browser will make outside of that scope. If you start by broadening the scope from webpage to browser, you eventually get to the o…

>… so doesn't have access to it many requests the browser will make outside of that scope.

You have access if you chose to modify/recompile the .cpp/.rs files that deal with sending requests that those higher level functions use, this is what I do.

Some particular places of interest on /mozilla-central/:

- /servo/components/style/gecko/urls.rs, will pertain to calls called from css image functions

- /netwerk/protocol/http/nsHttpHandler.cpp, some classess that deal with handling things related to sending all http requests

Re: Firefox Configuration Guide for Privacy Freaks and Performance Buffs

#19

Post by goblins »

sohkamyung wrote: post #6

One thing not mentioned in the list is Firefox Multi-Account Containers [1]. It helps by segregating your on-line information (cookies) into separate containers that you set up. It doesn't stop sites pulling all cookies, but it reduces the amount of information being sent: only the information in the same container is accessible. [1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/multi-account...

Thanks for this. I've been looking for something like this for ages. I used to use VM's for this but it was a right pain.

As an aside I used this guide having discovered it a couple of years ago. I can't remember how but I ended up on a site that had been hacked, might have been following a link from a forum, and the page I was looking for wasn't there. Instead there was a link on the page saying it had been moved. I stupidly clicked the link and off I went to a random site that I can only assume was meant to drop some form of malware or take control on my browser. Anyway all I was left with was a message congratulating me on how secure my browser was, I didn't stay around.

Post reply on HN