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

Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#61

Post by radicaldreamer »

llacb47 wrote: post #59

So this is basically a wrapper for Fanboy's cookie monster list? This is really nothing special IMO. Plus, the fact that the filters are inside of the app source and not fetched from a remote repo means that filtering errors (false-positives) will take hours or maybe days to be fixed, as the dev will need to push out an update (or pull Fanboy's upstream fixes), it will need to be approved by Apple, and then the user…

All these "apps" are required because Apple doesn't allow extensions like uBo to work with Safari and they force ("strongly encourage") developers who want to create simple extensions to go through and make a whole app with the right entitlements on both iOS and Mac.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#62

Post by colejohnson66 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #41
pensatoio wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re setting unreasonable expectations. Ad blocking has years of work behind it, and it still isn’t an exact science. Cookie banners are even harder, because they usually only come in the form of an element that blends in.

That's kind of the point. The solution is one by one blacklisting? If so it needs to be better than making tickets. What about a system to hide the elements manually and that action feeds into a database?

Have you ever looked at a blocklist? It’s literally thousands upon thousands of rules. And you blocking something shouldn’t add it to a list because what you block may not be what someone else wants blocked.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#63

Post by colejohnson66 »

_jstreet wrote: post #43
mikhailt wrote: post #30

Is there any work being done to revert the requirements of cookie banners, age consent, etc? These are all utterly pointless and easy to bypass. While we're at it, get rid of the forced "piracy is harmful" ads on every media disc too. Pirates don't actually see these messages, they're stripped out in the final copy, so the actual legal customers are the only one suffering through it as they can't be skipped either wi…

I wonder that too. Would this be something the W3C would look into introducing some configurable cookie-consent (i.e. "Accept all", "necessary only", "block all" options) that browser vendors could then pick-up on and adopt so that it wouldn't require manual checks at each website visit?

As the DNT header history shows, the only solution is privacy laws

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#64

Post by galad87 »

llacb47 wrote: post #59

So this is basically a wrapper for Fanboy's cookie monster list? This is really nothing special IMO. Plus, the fact that the filters are inside of the app source and not fetched from a remote repo means that filtering errors (false-positives) will take hours or maybe days to be fixed, as the dev will need to push out an update (or pull Fanboy's upstream fixes), it will need to be approved by Apple, and then the user…

It doesn't need to be approved by Apple. The app can download a new list directly. Or run in background and update the list when needed.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#65

Post by llacb47 »

galad87 wrote: post #64
llacb47 wrote: post #59

So this is basically a wrapper for Fanboy's cookie monster list? This is really nothing special IMO. Plus, the fact that the filters are inside of the app source and not fetched from a remote repo means that filtering errors (false-positives) will take hours or maybe days to be fixed, as the dev will need to push out an update (or pull Fanboy's upstream fixes), it will need to be approved by Apple, and then the user…

It doesn't need to be approved by Apple. The app can download a new list directly. Or run in background and update the list when needed.

Yes, but submitting a new version is what the dev is doing, at least right now. https://github.com/oblador/hush/issues/13#issuecomment-76639...

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#66

Post by ryukafalz »

crazygringo wrote: post #58
ryukafalz wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the cookie banner requirements are just fine: they're only required if sites are tracking you. It's a good sign that if I'm on a site that's not bothering me with a cookie banner, it's respecting my privacy: https://github.blog/2020-12-17-no-cookie-for-you/ Making the widespread surveillance that was previously invisible visible (and annoying) seems like a good move to me.

But virtually every site I visit is tracking me. It doesn't change the fact that they're tracking me, it just makes me click an "X" or "OK" every damned time I visit some new site to read an article or something. I could understand your argument if sites were actually removing tracking in order not to annoy users with the popup. But sites aren't doing that, not in any meaningful number at all. So it's not having any…

Before cookie banners were required, do you think the average user would have any idea how many sites were tracking them? I don't think they did. It's beneficial if only to increase public awareness, because tracking is otherwise invisible.

Heck, I'm a reasonably technical user, and I wouldn't have noticed in most cases. Again, invisible. Now I have a negative first impression of a site if it annoys me with cookie banners, and a more positive one if not.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#67

Post by Nextgrid »

mikhailt wrote: post #30

Is there any work being done to revert the requirements of cookie banners, age consent, etc? These are all utterly pointless and easy to bypass. While we're at it, get rid of the forced "piracy is harmful" ads on every media disc too. Pirates don't actually see these messages, they're stripped out in the final copy, so the actual legal customers are the only one suffering through it as they can't be skipped either wi…

Cookie banners aren't required per-se, and when the website wishes to do tracking that would require consent under the GDPR, the regulation mandates that the consent prompt should be clear, opt-in (aka pre-ticked checkboxes aren't allowed) and that accepting should be as easy as declining (so if opting in takes one click, so should opt-out).

The problem is that the GDPR is not being enforced seriously so these breaches of the regulation aren't being cleaned up. I'm not sure if it's malice or outright stupidity and the companies legitimately believe they are compliant (there is tons of bad and incorrect advice out there).

If you want things to change and you're in Europe, you should start by questioning the incompetence of your local data protection agency as they are the ones that have the power to investigate breaches & impose fines. In the UK, the Open Rights Group is raising money to sue our data protection agency for its incompetence/unwillingness to enforce the regulation, so maybe it's worth checking out: https://action.openrightsgroup.org/help-us-protect-your-data... (no affiliation)

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#68

Post by Nextgrid »

rakoo wrote: post #60
jolux wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of those cookie banners specifically make it harder to opt out of inessential cookies, though. That part bothers me a lot.

That's by design, they want you to click on "I accept everything" without reading. It's the choice that the website owners did

This is also explicitly against the regulation they're trying to comply with - at which point they may as well just not ask for consent to begin with.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#69

Post by Nextgrid »

macinjosh wrote: post #25
bombcar wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many websites implemented the banner because other websites are implementing them. There’s a lot of bandwagons out there.

The EU used the force and threat of law to force everyone to do it.

The thing is, the EU is not using the force of the law because the law explicitly bans annoying or misleading consent prompts, so should the law be enforced, the problem would self-resolve very quickly.

Re: Hush: Noiseless Browsing for Safari

#70

Post by kitsunesoba »

galad87 wrote: post #64
llacb47 wrote: post #59

So this is basically a wrapper for Fanboy's cookie monster list? This is really nothing special IMO. Plus, the fact that the filters are inside of the app source and not fetched from a remote repo means that filtering errors (false-positives) will take hours or maybe days to be fixed, as the dev will need to push out an update (or pull Fanboy's upstream fixes), it will need to be approved by Apple, and then the user…

It doesn't need to be approved by Apple. The app can download a new list directly. Or run in background and update the list when needed.

Yes, Wipr does exactly this. Safari content blocker extension blocklists don't have to be static — the host app and (I think) native extension code can modify blocklists as needed.
Post reply on HN