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

Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 786 posts

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#331

Post by jefftk »

viseztrance wrote: post #282
jefftk wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Safari, Chrome, and Edge already partitioned the HTTP Cache by site; Firefox was the last major browser not to. It's great that Firefox is doing this, but it's not a differentiator.

The way they phrased it, in the post implies otherwise? > These impacts are similar to those reported by the Chrome team for similar cache protections they are planning to roll out.

See https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2020/10/http-cache...

"The feature is being rolled out through late 2020. To check whether your Chrome instance already supports it: ..."

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#332

Post by tyingq »

mikl wrote: post #216
falsaberN1 wrote: post #171

The partitioning thing is terrible for people with slow/unstable connections, despite the security gains. Is there a way to disable it? Or should I better think about installing a caching proxy to avoid the redundant traffic?

I think you’re overestimating the impact of this. Most web site content these days are served from the web site owner’s own domain. It’s only if a.com and b.com have (for example) the exact same image URL (c.com/img123.jpg) embedded, and you visit both sites, that this cache partitioning will make a difference. In essence, there’s very little legitimate Internet traffic that would be effected by this change, but lots…

I see what you're saying. But, for example, all of the new DNS queries for things like jQuery and Google Analytics surely add up to something noticeable.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#333

Post by jb1991 »

Can anyone explain the fingerprinting issue, unrelated to cookies. Visit any one of these many sites that show you what your browser knows about you, it doesn’t matter if using Firefox with fingerpring blocking enabled, the site reveals a tremendous amount of information in your fingerprint. Firefox doesn’t stop any of that, despite its settings that purport to do so. It's always the same information, not scrambled or randomized, from site to site.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#334

Post by ldiracdelta »

notriddle wrote: post #211
WC3w6pXxgGd wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not use Brave? It has all of this, with Fingerprint protection turned on by default.

Because cryptocurrency is a scam.

Then don't use the cryptocurrency part.. it isn't all-or-nothing.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#335

Post by gumby »

jdhzzz wrote: post #317
mstade wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how many people reading this comment are thinking, "what's a fax machine?" :o) I like the analogy, but I wonder how effective it is on anyone under the age of what, 35?

I'm old enough to remember (like New Coke) ZapMail by FedEx where you would send documents by FedEx and FedEx would Fax it on their equipment to a location near the recipient for physical delivery. Obligatory Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zapmail . Hey, most businesses didn't have one of those newfangled FAX machines.

Newfangled? It will enter its third century in a decade or so.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#336

Post by gumby »

zxexz wrote: post #236
mstade wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder how many people reading this comment are thinking, "what's a fax machine?" :o) I like the analogy, but I wonder how effective it is on anyone under the age of what, 35?

You might be surprised how many of us under-35s still have to use Fax machines on a regular basis ;)

Especially in Japan.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#337

Post by darrylb42 »

yyyk wrote: post #327
pants-no-pants wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My bank still accepts fax documents. All I would have to do is find a fax machine ...

There are quite a few multifunction printers with fax.

That assumes a land line to plug the fax machine into.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#338

Post by gumby »

freeone3000 wrote: post #320
gaius_baltar wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My bank still accepts fax documents. All I would have to do is find a fax machine ... On linux you can use [efax]( https://linux.die.net/man/1/efax ) and a modem and... ooops, good luck finding a modem. I did this for real ~10 years ago when a stupid company didn't accept a scanned PDF by email and required a fax of the actual document "because security". The difference is that I had a modem in an old laptop at tha…

GSM yes, but once phones went digital that capability was lost.

GSM phones are digital and include a special FAX mode.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#339

Post by floatingatoll »

falsaberN1 wrote: post #171

The partitioning thing is terrible for people with slow/unstable connections, despite the security gains. Is there a way to disable it? Or should I better think about installing a caching proxy to avoid the redundant traffic?

You’d be better off installing a caching proxy, so that all connections from all of your devices share one cache, rather than only altering settings in one browser.

If you’re a Mac user with more than one of any kind of Apple device on your network (like, two Macs), you can install their Server app on any macOS and enable software update caching as well.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#340

Post by McDyver »

wejick wrote: post #319
warent wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I run a network ad-block dns (pihole) and consistently 25-33% of all my network traffic is blocked as ads. It's much more than I ever imagined. Now I'm used to a different internet, when I'm using internet off the network it's like WTF is this?

My issue with pihole or any other DNS adblocker is I can't whitelist some website that I love. As evil as ada network, but I still want my favorite site to get some revenue.

Maybe your favourite site would welcome a direct contribution, instead of an ad click
Post reply on HN