Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just to clarify, Total Cookie Protection in Firefox is not the same as blocking third-party cookies. Firefox will accept third-party cookies and send them back, but only on this particular site. So third parties (read ad networks) will be able to track you on any site, but not across sites (without some other means of tracking).
If you don’t want Firefox to do even that, you can go to Settings, click on Privacy & Security, then choose the Strict option. It’ll warn you that it might break sites, but you can always turn it off on a site-specific level by clicking on the shield in the address bar and turning off the toggle.
Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
111–120 of 339 posts
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
> so they can use server-side ID syncs Does this only work if you use the same email across multiple sites? If so it's yet another reason to use a different email address with every site you sign up at.
Which incidentally Mozilla also has a product for: https://relay.firefox.com (Disclosure: I work on Firefox Relay :) And yes, I know some people also have their own domain with unlimited email addresses.)
Do you believe DDG will also eventually move to the subscription model for these features (unlimited aliases, reply to sender)?
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#113Their cookie allow dialog has over 700 data share partners, not including their own "legitimate interest" cookies. The dialog looks like this [1] and cannot be resized and is lazy loaded (i.e. you have to manually scroll to have the page load all of them with a few visible each scroll). And its slow so it takes a while and doesn't play well with the mouse in the iframe. There are even ones not in english or latin characters [2]
[1] https://imgur.com/a/ciuRWSx [2] https://i.imgur.com/4yc6Flo.png
Anyway i lazy loaded all of them and there are 753 (the html just to display it is > 1 megabyte
$ xmllint --format reach2.html | grep qc-cmp2-list-item-header | tail && xmllint --format reach2.html | grep qc-cmp2-list-item-header | wc -l
753
It's crazyRe: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#114This will only further entrench the big players (google, facebook, etc) while making it impossible for new & small players to compete. All of the services the big players offer effectively make working without universal cookies trivial. For the small players though, without massive ad-supported service offerings like Gmail, Facebook (as a platform), etc, this will screw them completely. Mind you, I'm a HUGE privacy a…
1. Cookie Auto-Delete (see https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete/wiki/...), where cookies and local data are automatically deleted some time after closing the tab. You can, of course, whitelist Websites to exclude them.
2. Firefox multi-container extension, to assign some websites (domains and subdomains) to a container by default so that you can visit some specific Google sites without being logged in (e.g Web search, News, Maps…) but still open Gmail and be connected to your account.
You can make this more intuitive and combine that in a single button: "Do not forget. Optionally, open website in ".
This would drastically level the playing field, as one can continue to use some Google/Apple services for work (e.g Play developers console, Google calendar…) but all visit to other properties would not be tracked. No need to switch between browsers, profiles or containers, this is automatic.
I've been using this set up for years now, and it works perfectly – just add uBlock and I don't care about cookies, and you'll ever see an ad or a cookie prompt ever again. Perfect.
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#115I wonder if there's anyone from any advertising/ad-targeting companies on HN who can shed some light on if/how much this change may affect their "product". Asking this since I know friends working at companies that were DRASTICALLY affected by the Apple advertising changes in terms of user targetability (and hence revenue) and I'm wondering if this change will be similar.
Firefox has a sub 8% market share, so I doubt this will make a drastic change to how they operate.
Edit: thanks for the downvotes, I would have preferred if it worked but it didn't. I tried basic troubleshooting, disabling extensions etc. but didn't find it usable on macOs Monterey, think it doesn't play well with youtube.
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#116I wonder if there's anyone from any advertising/ad-targeting companies on HN who can shed some light on if/how much this change may affect their "product". Asking this since I know friends working at companies that were DRASTICALLY affected by the Apple advertising changes in terms of user targetability (and hence revenue) and I'm wondering if this change will be similar.
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#117I've never understood the thinking that went behind allowing one site to see the existence of another site's cookie in the first place. I don't think I'm even coming at this with the security hindsight of decades, it's just common sense, isn't it?
It's not that one site is seeing another site. It's that multiple sites will serve content (ads, Javascript libraries, like buttons) from a common site (eg an ad network) that uses its own domain. That domain is allowed to get the cookie for itself because it is referenced by multiple site, that's how this type of tracking works. If you go to bbc.com, it still won't be able to see cookies from cnn.com, but say if adv…
Wouldn't simply installing an ad/tracking blocker like uBlock Origin be just as effective, if not moreso?
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#118Why weren't separate cookie jars the default in the first place? I know that browsers other than Firefox have no real incentive to protect your privacy, but I'm wondering why cookies were designed to be shared among different pages in general
Tracking today is an interaction between cookies and pages, not really because cookies were designed to be shared between domains. Because of that, ads on web pages are a reason that information gets shared across sites. Any ad or other iFramed content that’s served on a site can get the domain name of where it’s be served from and then access the iFrame domain’s cookies, which enables tracking.
The cookie jar language might be a tiny bit oversimplifying/confusing in the sense that cookies are already separated from each other according to the cookie’s domain - they’re already in separate jars in a way, and this feature is changing how they partition the jars. Assuming even the most strict privacy settings, tracking cookies and scripts are often in iFrames and may not have the ability to directly read other cookies from the web site in your URL bar, and the web site might not be able read the tracking cookies. It’s not that cookies themselves are being shared per se. It’s that (say) Facebook is allowed to put an iFramed tracker on some site, and Facebook can then get a tracking blip when you visit that site and add it to a Facebook-only cookie. Total Cookie Protection is going to put cookies that only Facebook can see in a different jar for each separate site you visit, making it so that Facebook can’t read it’s own cookies across different sites.
Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#119Re: Firefox rolls out Total Cookie Protection by default to all users
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don’t want Firefox to do even that, you can go to Settings, click on Privacy & Security, then choose the Strict option. It’ll warn you that it might break sites, but you can always turn it off on a site-specific level by clicking on the shield in the address bar and turning off the toggle.
Be aware though that this will make firefox tell sites that you want a light color scheme instead of doing the more sensible thing and indicating no preference.