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

531–540 of 786 posts

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#531

Post by michaelmior »

emayljames wrote: post #357
michaelmior wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> never see an ad again I wish that were true. Although uBlock Origin does a good job, some ads definitely still make it through. There are also some sites that detect ad blockers and refuse to let you in unless you disable it. There are workarounds for some of these, but it's still a bit of a mess.

I agree, although to add, uBlock Origin has an 'annoyances' list that does a pretty good job of stopping detectors.

Thanks for the reminder that I hadn't enabled this in my current browser :)

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#532

Post by spiralx »

jamiequint wrote: post #437
makecheck wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern ad networks are essentially the “fax machine flyers” of old: someone you don’t know using your resources and your time, denying you use of your own resources temporarily, to send you something you don’t want. Except now it’s like every “normal” fax page includes 15,000 flyers.

This is a terrible analogy. Nobody forced you to go to the website that voluntarily decided to include the trackers.

If that website doesn't ask me if I want to allow those trackers then it's forcing them upon me without my consent. How am I supposed to know if a website has a tracker before I visit it?

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#533

Post by woof »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #468
huron wrote: post #466

From a purely web browsing experience the first iPad 'should be' powerful enough to browse ANYTHING out there these days. But it can't. The last few models will increasingly have the same issues as the sheer volume of muck and cruft that's included with the advertising gack just continues to explode. I'm definitely of the opinion that our web browsing devices are marketing tools that we are allowed to use for media c…

The first iPad sucked a whole bunch. Only 256mb RAM especially hurt. But I hear what you’re saying.

I loved mine at least a year and was quite happy for another year. Some sites worked awesome, others sucked hard due to crazy pay loads.

I blame shitty sites more than Apples architecture :(

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#535

Post by commotionfever »

buzzy_hacker wrote: post #188
newscracker wrote: post #91

Use uBlock Origin, Multi Account Containers, Privacy Badger, Decentraleyes and CookieAutoDelete with Firefox. Make sure you aggressively clear cache, cookies, etc., periodically (with CookieAutoDelete). You’ll probably load the web servers more and also add more traffic on your network, but it will help protect your privacy since most websites don’t care about that. When websites are user hostile, you have to take pr…

Agree, but substituting multi-account containers with temporary containers https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...

temporary containers is really nice. but how can you replace MAC with it? I tried before couldn't assign some domains to "permanent" containers.

eg. I'd like use temp containers all the time, except for some sites like YouTube where I'd like it to always open in a YouTube container

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#536

Post by skeletonjelly »

SamuelAdams wrote: post #369
newscracker wrote: post #91

Use uBlock Origin, Multi Account Containers, Privacy Badger, Decentraleyes and CookieAutoDelete with Firefox. Make sure you aggressively clear cache, cookies, etc., periodically (with CookieAutoDelete). You’ll probably load the web servers more and also add more traffic on your network, but it will help protect your privacy since most websites don’t care about that. When websites are user hostile, you have to take pr…

Or enable private browsing all the time. You'll have to log into your accounts every time you open your browser, but that's not really a big deal with a decent password manager. [1]: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-clear-firefox-cache...

Can you be tracked within the private browsing mode though? For instance in Chrome private tabs I know if you log in to something then open a new tab, that tab retains the cookies from the private session until you close all private tabs. Is this the same with Firefox? I'm hesitant to install yet another extension but I'm wondering if this one mentioned elsewhere in this thread will fix it, if it is the case with firefox

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#538

Post by takeda »

kristofferR wrote: post #308
milofeynman wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Decentraleyes is what I use. I assume they're similar https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/decentraleyes...

LocalCDN is an updated fork of Decentraleyes. Decentraleyes hasn't been updated in ages, has few assets and its assets are massively out of date. https://git.synz.io/Synzvato/decentraleyes/-/tree/master/res... vs https://codeberg.org/nobody/LocalCDN/src/branch/main/resourc...

My Decentraleyes was updated in November 5th, that's not that long ago. LocalCDN extension has also a comment that Mozilla doesn't regularly monitor it for security.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#539

Post by kortilla »

callmeal wrote: post #389
ghayes wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious how bad disabling this caching feature would be. Specifically, how often do you load the same image on two different domains?

Instead of thinking "same image on different domains, think "hidden uniquely-named single pixel image".

That’s the same thing. In order for that tracking method to work, this uniquely named pixel has to be loaded while visiting multiple sites. So it ends up being multiple domains referencing the same image from some tracker resource.

Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies

#540

Post by kortilla »

floatboth wrote: post #275
Gare wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They load the image URL and observe the loading time. If it's fetched quickly, they know it was from cache. The server (controlled by the advertisers) can intentionally add delay to those image requests that makes detection reliable.

With some forms of caching it's much simpler: the browser sends an ETag or If-Modified-Since and the server is supposed to return 304 Not Modified to optimize the load if the cached resource is still valid.

But from JavaScript I don’t think you can see that. You just get the end result of the image being served to you. You have to infer it from timing.
Post reply on HN