Any recommendations for a good ad blocker and other precautions to take?
I use Wipr on Safari for Mac & iPhone
Another very satisfied Wipr user here - it just works.
The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
351–360 of 445 posts
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#352Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do all the people who use computers to browse the internet (the majority of people on the internet) suddenly no longer exist?
Mobile internet usage overtook desktop towards the end of 2016. Currently mobile usage sits at about 65% worldwide (slightly below 60% in the US).
It will probably end up like C. P. Snow's The Two Cultures and for many never the twain shall meet. This shouldn't be surprising really given the diversity of people, views, etc.
As for myself, I use both regularly but for serious work the PC/large screen predominates.
In recent years I've often found myself working on the PC with a collection of phones about me all with different but related information on them. It's akin to having multiple textbooks open on one's desk for reference. It's also a handy way of not cluttering up my PC screens with multiple windows/tabs open.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do all the people who use computers to browse the internet (the majority of people on the internet) suddenly no longer exist?
I'm wondering if those still are the majority, worldwide. Smart-phones have done a lot to democratize computing power (now if only they weren't used to put >90% of their users in corporate controlled walled gardens...)
That's the tragic outcome of that type of democratization and I'm not sure it can ever be fixed.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#354Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm wondering if those still are the majority, worldwide. Smart-phones have done a lot to democratize computing power (now if only they weren't used to put >90% of their users in corporate controlled walled gardens...)
Smart phones didn’t change anything here: 99% of their users didn’t care about the “open” nature of desktops before they were a thing, too. A vanishingly small percentage of computer users care about tinkering and openness. It’s been decades since tinkerers and hackers were the majority of computer users.
That tipping point was probably 1995 at latest.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Consent-O-Matic (auto fill cookie consent forms) This will modify the browser fringerprint making you more unique. I would not install so many extensions as you're trusting a huge number of organizations/people with privileged access to your browser. Anything that modifies CSS, Document Object Model (DOM) will make your browser stand out. We wrote a blog post about this: https://blog.privacyguides.org/2021/12/01/fi…
Trying to avoid tracking on the modern web is a losing battle for any but the most hyperparanoid, consistently careful, and technically astute individuals. For everyone else: you're going to leak identity information one way or another, and it's going to get correlated. The more plugged-in and connected you are, the harder it is to remain anonymous. If you really value your privacy, don't use the internet or any type…
This comment is true on the facts, but militates for what I consider to be a poor conclusion. I know a lot of people who talk this way, and it's usually those who are best positioned to defend themselves from surveillance. This is annoying to me because giving up on surveillance defense doesn't really make sense in the long term for individuals, and we need technical experts in the resistance.
Try to remember that policy, law, and major social trends tend to have slower feedback loops than other machines. It's hard to know today where we will innovate that will ultimately make a contribution to societal progress, but I can tell you with pretty high certainty that giving up won't help change anything for the better.
Like the lady said, "We live in capitalism, its power seems inescapable--but then, so did the divine right of kings."
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do all the people who use computers to browse the internet (the majority of people on the internet) suddenly no longer exist?
I'm still here. I've used a browser on my phone exactly once to register my phone. With exception to that one time I only use Firefox on Linux on an old PC.
Why did you bother to register your phone then? I've used many smartphones and never registered any of them. I wouldn't give the time of day to Google or Apple let alone my personal details.
Similarly, I use Firefox on Linux but I also regularly browse the web or post to HN on a phone that's been heavily deloused of Google using Firefox and other browsers—but never Chrome.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#357Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heh, you got me. A password manager is the ONE plugin I have installed in my profile that I use to access my banks. Simply put, I trust the password manager. Recently, however, I have considered uninstalling that plugin and using only the desktop version of the password manager -- and then copy/pasting username/pw from the password manager to websites. One reason I don't do that, though... is because having the passw…
Use the built-in browser password manager. It is safe and it only auto fills for the correct URL… exactly what you mentioned. You should be able to export from your current PW manager and import into the browser’s. Then turn on browser sync to make sure those passwords are available on all browser instances.
This is the last thing I expected to see on HN but after reading this I have to ask - is it ever remotely safe? Asking for a friend.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#358FBI must have infiltrated ad blocker servers containing malicious url lists. Never using an adblocker again.
Technically, noscript is a better solution. (I still use uMatrix sometimes)
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#359Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But loading ad's are the much greater security issue. How so? You're just retrieving the data and displaying it. > And if you care about "uniqueness" you have that already with your IP There are many ISP's that use NAT to save IP addresses, hence an IP is not really an identifier. Even if not, an IP is identifieing the all network, and all the ones that are connected to the same network. You can see how in YouTube…
>How so? You're just retrieving the data and displaying it. Yeah displaying data...that cant be dangerous ;) >There are many ISP's that use NAT to save IP addresses, hence an IP is not really an identifier. Do you really think your argumentation is good?
> Yeah displaying data...that cant be dangerous ;)
It's not dangerous because it's coming from a good source, such as google ads.
> Do you really think your argumentation is good?
Yes, because that's what happens. I don't really think an IP is a good identifier because it's shared by others. Using cookies is a much better option.
Re: The FBI now recommends using an ad blocker when searching the web
#360The FBI page in question[0] (I hope ic3.gov is legit!) says "Before clicking on an advertisement, check the URL to make sure the site is authentic." But on a mobile device nobody knows how to do that. And the URL will be some kind of ad redirect a mile long. FBI: "Rather than search...type the business’s URL into an internet browser’s address bar..." I'm not sure about this one. Typos easily happen, and it's the typo…
Yeah, it's been a long time outstanding to ban redirects to other domains.