Just add the domain to your /etc/hosts as 0.0.0.0 Doing that for years
Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
11–20 of 160 posts
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#12Blocking Google Tag Manager script injection seems to have few side effects. Blocking third party cookies also seems to have few side effects. Turning off Javascript breaks too much.
Use a whitelist-based extension such as NoScript:
You can then enable just enough JS to make sites work, slowly building a list of just what is necessary. It can also block fonts, webgl, prefetch, ping and all those other supercookie-enabling techniques.
The same with traditional cookies. I use Cookie AutoDelete to remove _all_ cookies as soon as I close the tab. I can then whitelist the ones I notice impact on authentication.
Also, you should disable JavaScript JIT, so the scripts that eventually load are less effective at exploiting potential vulnerabilities that could expose your data.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#13I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?
It really isn't. I've been blocking all JavaScript for years now, selectively allowing what is essential for sites to run or using a private session to allow more/investigate/discover. Most sites work fine without their 30 JS sources, just allowing what is hosted on their own domain. It takes a little effort, but it's a fair price to pay to have a sane Internet. The thing is - with everything - it's never easy to hav…
It's certainly not that bad if you have uMatrix to do it with, but I haven't found a reasonable way to do it on mobile. uMatrix does work on Firefox Mobile but the UI is only semi functional.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#14I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?
The sites that don't work are usually the worst websites around - you end up not missing much. And if it's a store or whatever, you can unblock all js when you actually want to buy.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#15I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?
StackOverflow switched over from spying with ajax.google.com to GTM in the past year or so. All for some pointless out of date jQuery code they could self-host. I wonder how much they're being paid to let Google collect user stats from their site.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really isn't. I've been blocking all JavaScript for years now, selectively allowing what is essential for sites to run or using a private session to allow more/investigate/discover. Most sites work fine without their 30 JS sources, just allowing what is hosted on their own domain. It takes a little effort, but it's a fair price to pay to have a sane Internet. The thing is - with everything - it's never easy to hav…
It's certainly not that bad if you have uMatrix to do it with, but I haven't found a reasonable way to do it on mobile. uMatrix does work on Firefox Mobile but the UI is only semi functional.
NoScript + uBO is all right.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#17I'm all for blocking surveillance but how tiring is it to block JavaScript as suggested and then watch the majority of the internet not work?
People who want you to run their scripts aren't really your friends
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#18> surveillanceware I thought the term was spyware. Surveillanceware almost sounds like something necessary to prevent bad stuff. Is this corporate rebranding to make spyware software sound less bad?
I don't know, the memetics of Surveillanceware or spyware mostly leads me to the belief that everything is weaponized to drain your money thru ads/marketing instead of the direct approach of stealing my money.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#19Just add the domain to your /etc/hosts as 0.0.0.0 Doing that for years
https://someonewhocares.org/hosts/zero/
I just did a wget of the site and noticed the following line at the end.
> " rel="nofollow">https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtag/js?xxxxxxx">
I am going to use this for sure, but it is a little ironic.
Re: Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022)
#20Am I dumb or does this article fail to explain what does the tag manager actually do? And not just with a loaded word, such as surveillance or spying, but actually technically explain what they are selling for and why it is bad.