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

An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 381 posts

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#101

Post by JadeNB »

chinathrow wrote: post #97
move-on-by wrote: post #4

> The reason we’ve stepped away from making blanket claims that “We never sell your data” is because, in some places, the LEGAL definition of “sale of data” is broad and evolving. As an example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) defines “sale” as the “selling, renting, releasing, disclosing, disseminating, making available, transferring, or otherwise communicating orally, in writing, or by electronic or othe…

Mozilla, then Phoenix, then Firefox user for over 27y or so. If they can't stop abusing their users, I will look for another browser, goddamnit.

> If they can't stop abusing their users, I will look for another browser, goddamnit.

This seems to go beyond "can't stop" to "are actively plotting a course to continue." I've seen a lot of missteps from Mozilla over the years, but I never thought I'd see them selling my data. From seeing the news yesterday to today, I know now I have to stop recommending Firefox, and figure out a browser that I can trust.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#102

Post by solardev »

lurk2 wrote: post #99

The one thing I haven't seen in any of these threads is where privacy-conscious users are supposed to go now. Are there any viable alternatives to Firefox?

Maybe Orion, if you trust Kagi enough?

https://kagi.com/orion/

It's webkit-based, and you can pay for it ($150 for a lifetime license).

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#103

Post by JadeNB »

lurk2 wrote: post #99

The one thing I haven't seen in any of these threads is where privacy-conscious users are supposed to go now. Are there any viable alternatives to Firefox?

We just had a thread on Ladybird that seemed positive, but I haven't tried it and so don't know what it's like as a browser.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43200604

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#106

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

userbinator wrote: post #92
wesapien wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one opted out of all the possible data collection and privacy related options, are they still able to collect your data? If yes, how does it work? Is this called client-side scanning?

Companies have been long concerned about exfiltration of data and ran MITM proxies to stop it, which ironically has been the target of propaganda about "privacy" by the browser makers. Every home network needs a MITM proxy too.

"Every home network needs a MITM proxy too."

I have been running one for long time now. I depend on it so much that I cannot imagine using the internet without it. It is much smaller and easier to compile than a graphical browser.

Others will have different opinions but I personally remain skeptical that TLS provides internet users with more value than it provides so-called "tech" companies that profit from data collection, surveillance and online advertising services, and the CDNs that collaborate with them. While it can be used to protect a computer owner's sensitive data from eavesdroppers as it transits across the open internet, e.g., during "e-commerce", in practice TLS is used to conceal data exfiltration from the computer owner for commercial purposes by so-called "tech" companies. Not to mention the issue of "Certificate Authorities".

IMO, this is analogous to the situation with Javascript. It has the potential to provide value to www users, e.g., as a language computer owners can use to extend and control a graphical browser,^1 but in practice it provides the most value to so-called tech "companies" that are using it to control _someone else's_ browser to allow unauthorised and/or concealed data collection and surveillance.

1. https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bambax/hntitles/refs/heads...

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#107

Post by lurk2 »

solardev wrote: post #102
lurk2 wrote: post #99

The one thing I haven't seen in any of these threads is where privacy-conscious users are supposed to go now. Are there any viable alternatives to Firefox?

Maybe Orion, if you trust Kagi enough? https://kagi.com/orion/ It's webkit-based, and you can pay for it ($150 for a lifetime license).

Proprietary?

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#108

Post by mmphosis »

nickthegreek wrote: post #95
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why are you putting trust on them more than firefox? Literally this article. I care about my privacy more than open source. And I care about honesty above both. If open source can’t deliver, so be it.

Waterfox or Librewolf aren’t viable alternatives?

The reports about this Terms of Use for Firefox pushed me to build from source and run LibreWolf. In the past, I have not been able to successfully build FireFox. Today was a breakthrough for me as I was able to successfully build and run LibreWolf. Things I like so far:

    open ... "about:telemetry"
 
        Blocked Page

        Your organization has blocked access to this page or website.

    Lots of sane defaults that actually respect privacy and security.

        uBlock Origin is installed by default.

        No information is sent back to Mozilla.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#109

Post by usr1106 »

diggernet wrote: post #67

> You give Mozilla the rights necessary to operate Firefox. This includes processing your data as we describe in the Firefox Privacy Notice. It also includes a nonexclusive, royalty-free, worldwide license for the purpose of doing as you request with the content you input in Firefox. You don't need a license for data you never see. When I use Firefox to type a comment on HN, that comment goes from me to HN. It doesn'…

Right. Some people want Sync, Pocket, oneline translation, etc. Others like me just want a browser. There should be a simple option to choose between a browser and some multifunction beast that some people and even more managers at Mozilla are dreaming of.

Re: An update on Mozilla's terms of use for Firefox

#110

Post by wtallis »

userbinator wrote: post #92
wesapien wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If one opted out of all the possible data collection and privacy related options, are they still able to collect your data? If yes, how does it work? Is this called client-side scanning?

Companies have been long concerned about exfiltration of data and ran MITM proxies to stop it, which ironically has been the target of propaganda about "privacy" by the browser makers. Every home network needs a MITM proxy too.

Don't forget the push for browsers to ignore your DHCP-provided DNS server and instead get their DNS from a server outside your control over an encrypted tunnel. It's an obvious attack on stuff like PiHole, with little to no real upside for users.
Post reply on HN