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

Facebook Container for Firefox

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 406 posts

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#231

Post by mih »

cornholio wrote: post #200

Third party cookies, and any way to fingerprint a specific user starting from high entropy user agents to screen resolution, font fingerprinting or canvas data, should be considered a breach of the browser security model. All sites should run in containers and no advertiser should be able to track you across sessions. When I want 3rd party interaction, I should need to opt in and connect the current site with Faceboo…

Ever encountered Google ReCaptcha when you've turned off third party cookies or while in incognito/private mode? It's a nightmare, even if you're logged into a Google account. You can be shown upto 7-8 challenges, painfully slow loading images and Google's insistence that they encountered malicious traffic from your IP when attempting to use the audio version. What's even worse is they track your mouse movements and fast solvers like me are penalized since they think I'm not human anymore.

As much as I hate third party cookies, turning them on drastically simplifies the captcha solving process. So much so, I now use a separate browser profile with third party cookies allowed, just for the sake of captcha heavy sites.

Given that Google benefits by tracking my activities and free labor from my captcha solving, they will always punish privacy conscious users via such dark patterns.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#232

Post by rocgf »

jakecopp wrote: post #99
ReverseCold wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I finally feel free to search for whatever I want and not have second thoughts. Doesn't Google also link sessions through IP Address? That combined with "how you usually browse" + interests is a very powerful deanonymization tool.

You may be very right. I haven't encountered any targeting related to search terms yet, but I'm sure they have the capability. I do need to make the leap to DuckDuckGo at some point!

Making the leap to DDG was way easier than I thought and I am really pissed now that I didn't do it months ago. As other have said, you can generally find anything you want and, if not, you always have !g. However, I now have an intuition as to what sort of searches might yield good results. Either way, I encourage everyone to do it. Just change your search engine to DDG in your browser and, after a couple of searches, you will forget it's not Google.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#233

Post by fwn »

icebraining wrote: post #227
fwn wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cookie notice policy led to the worst imaginable actual outcome: A state in which you either accept cookies (incl. third party) by default or you will be haunted by numbing "reminders" that cookies exist. Usually taking large parts of your small screen estate. Prior to that you could just disable them if you liked. One can say that policy makers had good intentions - certainly. However, I can not imagine a valid…

I don't disagree that the policy was a failure, I just disagree with your specific point made in the previous post.

Hmm. I'm not sure I can follow.

The browser not being able to distinguish between essential and non-essential cookies does not change the fact that cookies are and were entirely voluntary.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#234

Post by cherimoya »

indiv0 wrote: post #225
cornholio wrote: post #200

Third party cookies, and any way to fingerprint a specific user starting from high entropy user agents to screen resolution, font fingerprinting or canvas data, should be considered a breach of the browser security model. All sites should run in containers and no advertiser should be able to track you across sessions. When I want 3rd party interaction, I should need to opt in and connect the current site with Faceboo…

Exactly. Why aren't all websites run in containers by default (personally I'm envisioning per-domain containers)? What benefit do we get from full-coverage containerization not being the default?

Some sites rely on multiple domains to work. E.g. open auth, cdns are usually a separate domain, a lot of big corporates create new domains for “microsites” when they want to do something new but are tied down by slow moving corporate practices (although the world would be a better place without microsites).

Basically, you couldn’t do it without breaking a large part of the internet.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#235

Post by chmike »

I have a similar need for Google. I have two gmail accounts. One is to preserve my privacy. But I can only open one at the time. That's acceptable since I forward mails.

But then, everything I do at Google is tracked and associated with this opened gmail account.

Once we are connected to Google, we are kind of logged in Google. They can track everything we do, even searches.

The problem I'm facing is that I can't keep the Google agenda opened for one user, and be connected to Google gmail as the other user. That's how far the "logging to Google" has got.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#236

Post by cJ0th »

They have the right intention. But how is this useful? As far as I can tell, it does not prevent FF from leaking information that helps FB generate a fingerprint. I'd still reveal the same IP address (would be cool if Mozilla provided a VPN that all FB traffic goes through), the same browser, the same OS, screen resolution etc...

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#237

Post by ozim »

chmike wrote: post #235

I have a similar need for Google. I have two gmail accounts. One is to preserve my privacy. But I can only open one at the time. That's acceptable since I forward mails. But then, everything I do at Google is tracked and associated with this opened gmail account. Once we are connected to Google, we are kind of logged in Google. They can track everything we do, even searches. The problem I'm facing is that I can't kee…

For email maybe use Thunderbird instead of browser. I have multiple mail accounts for different stuff on gmail. I do not login to it through web interface. It would be too much work and in Thunderbird I have also mails from other providers in one place.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#238

Post by reacharavindh »

newscracker wrote: post #170

If you use Firefox Containers, including the Facebook Container, please also use Cookie AutoDelete [1] to get rid of cookies from closed tabs across containers. Otherwise, in my observation, sites will still be able to track you if you reuse a container (even after closing all tabs of that container) for a specific site. [1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/cookie-autode...

Thanks for this. I was wondering when Firefox would give such an option in the browser, but never bother to search for plugins.

Re: Facebook Container for Firefox

#240

Post by icebraining »

fwn wrote: post #233
icebraining wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree that the policy was a failure, I just disagree with your specific point made in the previous post.

Hmm. I'm not sure I can follow. The browser not being able to distinguish between essential and non-essential cookies does not change the fact that cookies are and were entirely voluntary.

Right, but there's no reason to think the legislators didn't know that, because their goal was not to prevent the use of all cookies.
Post reply on HN