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

Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 125 posts

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#81

Post by Chris2048 »

userbinator wrote: post #6

This is basically a MITM proxy, which I'd say is really essential for true adblocking and content filtering, especially on the locked-down mobile platforms and with the rise of HTTPS. The question is then who runs the proxy and whether you trust them. I've been doing the same with Proxomitron for years, although in that case I run the proxy, I certainly trust myself, and --- I'm not sure about whether these apps even…

It's funny though; I know and love Proxomitron, but the source code is lost to time, no? doesn't that make it an unknown risk?

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#82

Post by cik »

I've built more than one VPN network over the years - and I don't use the ones I built. My philosophy has always been that I can't trust the network after I no longer own it - and if the code isn't open.

The hard reality is that you have no way of knowing what's being logged if you don't have full access to the servers. I've always pushed for leaving VPN servers on operating systems running in read-only, on read-only disks, and open to the world (i.e customers who log in). It's one of the best forms of real transparency that I can think of.

Funny, I never won that one.

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#83

Post by userbinator »

Chris2048 wrote: post #81
userbinator wrote: post #6

This is basically a MITM proxy, which I'd say is really essential for true adblocking and content filtering, especially on the locked-down mobile platforms and with the rise of HTTPS. The question is then who runs the proxy and whether you trust them. I've been doing the same with Proxomitron for years, although in that case I run the proxy, I certainly trust myself, and --- I'm not sure about whether these apps even…

It's funny though; I know and love Proxomitron, but the source code is lost to time, no? doesn't that make it an unknown risk?

It's from an era when software was largely not ad-supported nor infused with "telemetry", and written by one person who never "sold out" (and sadly passed away long ago), so I trust it far more than all the shady "privacy" services today. It's been around long enough that many others have reverse-engineered and analysed it substantially, understanding it enough to make patches to improve and fix, as well as near-equivalents. Look up "Proxydomo" if you want to go down that rabbit hole...

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#84

Post by AznHisoka »

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #76

> “ Apple and Google restrict root certificate privileges due to the security risk to users. Sensor Tower’s apps bypass the restrictions by prompting users to install a certificate through an external website after an app is downloaded.” Seems like it will be open and shut case, quickly banning the apps and hopefully Sensor Tower entirely, especially given the other details of the article explaining they’ve already b…

if they ban their apps, would the certificate still be installed in your phone if you installed it previously?

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#85

Post by Razengan »

jackewiehose wrote: post #77
Angostura wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every other browser vendor is a for-profit entity, and as such will limit good ad-blocking measures as Safari I thought Safari introduced support for Content Blockers specifically to avoid ad blockers from phoning home and passing potentially sensitive information to the ad blocker's writer. Lots of people then got quite cross that their favourite blocker had been blocked.

That is exactly the bullshit they want you to believe. Restricting your ability to install/modify software on your computer because bad software could harm you. You have been bamboozled.

... This entire discussion IS about bad software that DOES harm you, and you rag on the measures to specifically protect against something like that? What the heck?

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#86

Post by eternalban »

cik wrote: post #82

I've built more than one VPN network over the years - and I don't use the ones I built. My philosophy has always been that I can't trust the network after I no longer own it - and if the code isn't open. The hard reality is that you have no way of knowing what's being logged if you don't have full access to the servers. I've always pushed for leaving VPN servers on operating systems running in read-only, on read-only…

Why not start your own virtuous VPN company.

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#87

Post by SmartWa »

3xblah wrote: post #31
rubyn00bie wrote: post #20

This is literally, one among many reasons (ha!), why I use Firefox. Every other browser vendor is a for-profit entity, and as such will limit good ad-blocking measures as Safari and Chrome have done recently with their new "security" policies. This is also why I don't use a VPN I don't run (or certainly not one that hasn't been audited with a good reputation), and I certainly would never fucking dream of using a free…

"Every other browser vendor is a for-profit entity, ..." Not the one that authored the text-only browser I am typing this from. Whether Mozilla turns a profit or not makes little difference in this instance. Mozilla does not survive on donations from users. Its employees are not volunteers working for free to defend user privacy. Its generously compensated executives and staff need money from the online ad business,…

Can you recommend one text-only browser?

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#88

Post by rndomsrmn »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #3

Proprietary ad blockers cannot be trusted. It is better to use something like AdAway and Firefox with uBlock Origin.

A dnscrypt-proxy setup with https://github.com/notracking/hosts-blocklists/tree/master/d... goes a long way!

For anything that is not blockable on DNS level one should use uBlock Origin from Gorhill.

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#89

Post by sneak »

3xblah wrote: post #57
cortesoft wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you block the app from phoning home with the data? You have to trust it not to do that.

I use two devices. The first runs a kernel+userland I can edit and acts as the gateway/AP and DNS server for the second, which runs some commercially-motivated, "locked-down" consumer OS.

What hardware are you using for the gateway/AP? What's the backhaul, a USB LTE modem? Do you carry it in a handbag with a USB battery pack?

I've been thinking about doing this and scrapping all but one of my data plans, and having a robust default-deny whitelist of allowed IPs/netblocks/hostnames on the phone vlan/ssid, but haven't worked out all the details yet.

How are you doing it?

Re: Sensor Tower owns ad blocker and VPN apps that collect user data

#90

Post by jackewiehose »

Razengan wrote: post #85
jackewiehose wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is exactly the bullshit they want you to believe. Restricting your ability to install/modify software on your computer because bad software could harm you. You have been bamboozled.

... This entire discussion IS about bad software that DOES harm you, and you rag on the measures to specifically protect against something like that? What the heck?

Yes, I'm not saying there is no harmful software, I'm saying these kind of "protections" are the wrong solution. The same people who install blindly any add-ons will also install any exe-files if the promising website tells them to because the browsers add-on-system does not provide the required mechanics.

So the next step is to disallow exe-files. But of course you can let the exe-file get signed for a "small" fee...

Post reply on HN