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

Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 301 posts

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#111

Post by icelancer »

ksk wrote: post #93
icelancer wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

....so? Site owners are not guaranteed this access; their script runs on the client computer. I say this as someone who does a lot of analytical research and re-targeting and would be hurt if this was rolled out on a larger scale; I just don't think I have a right to the data.

Well, if don't care about things that prevent you from doing your job, then what exactly is the point of working in that field?

They don't prevent me from doing my job. It makes it harder. Oh no, I have to work harder.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#112

Post by Darthy »

vim_wannabe wrote: post #2

>“It’s not about blocking ads, the web behaves as it always did, but your privacy is protected,” he added. Does this mean browser fingerprint is somehow scrambled before it is sent to the tracker instead of blocking?

I doubt the next Safari also addresses browser fingerprinting. Otherwise, Apple would have mentioned it. Most likely, ad networks will adopt browser fingerprinting over the next few months, and then Apple will introduce some solution to that in a year or two.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#113

Post by icelancer »

ksk wrote: post #110
epistasis wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kind of presuming the wrong thing there. There's still work to be done, right? Just because something would make the job easier does not mean it should be done, ethics come first.

Um, they were already tracking people, and now they can't (presumably). If ethics were a priority why were they working that job in the first place?

There is nothing unethical about using Google Analytics. I also am not entitled to this access, by the very nature of how it works.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#114

Post by k-mcgrady »

miles wrote: post #105
ch4ck wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internet Explorer has tracking protection since IE9.

They are completely different beasts. Internet Explorer merely offers the option to enable[1] "Do Not Track", which websites and advertisers are free to ignore[2], while Safari's new ad tracker blocker "uses machine learning to identify trackers, segregate the cross-site scripting data, put it away so now your privacy — your browsing history — is your own"[3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track#Internet_E…

Also worth pointing out that Safari has had the 'do not track' feature for years and Twitter recently announced they are going to start ignoring it (a good example of how useless it is). So this new protection is very necessary and a great USP for Safari.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#115

Post by Arnavion »

derefr wrote: post #83
gsnedders wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't even need the font metrics API. Draw a span containing the character "m", measure the width of the span using Element.clientWidth. Unless you taint (almost literally) the entire CSSOM, you can pull off similar things.

Is there a reason to not taint the entire CSSOM? Alternately: why not anonymize CSSOM return values? Your browser might have access to OS fonts A+B+C, but if your JS asked the CSSOM about the size of characters on the page, the answer it would give would come from an "alternate world" where the browser only has access to the web-safe fonts, and so is using one of them.

Pixel-correct measurement of fonts / text is a must-have for certain specific applications like subtitle renderers. (I maintain one.)

For a specific example, it's more pleasing to split a long line of text in a way that all the split lines have roughly the same length - "a a a b b b" -> "a a a\nb b b". But CSS only gives you one way to split lines - as much text as possible in all but the last line and whatever's leftover in the last line - "a a a b b\nb". This means a renderer library has to be able to measure the width of text to be able to insert linebreaks itself.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#116

Post by 3pt14159 »

vim_wannabe wrote: post #2

>“It’s not about blocking ads, the web behaves as it always did, but your privacy is protected,” he added. Does this mean browser fingerprint is somehow scrambled before it is sent to the tracker instead of blocking?

Stopping fingerprinting right now is essentially impossible for a motivated attacker. It's enough to block the dumb trackers, but as long as performance is a consideration caches will exist. And as long as caches exist, so will fingerprinting.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#117

Post by ksk »

icelancer wrote: post #113
ksk wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, they were already tracking people, and now they can't (presumably). If ethics were a priority why were they working that job in the first place?

There is nothing unethical about using Google Analytics. I also am not entitled to this access, by the very nature of how it works.

I think you responded to the wrong person. I didn't claim it was unethical.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#118

Post by Eric_WVGG »

It says a lot about the state of the web that both Apple and Google are looking at publishers and saying "Look, if you won't fix your websites, we'll fix them for you" (Google in the form of AMP on mobile devices). However, as one of those who subscribes to the opinion that AMP breaks the web, I greatly prefer Apple's approach.

It makes me wonder how many publishers at national newspapers and magazines are even aware of what’s going on.

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#119

Post by ksk »

icelancer wrote: post #111
ksk wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, if don't care about things that prevent you from doing your job, then what exactly is the point of working in that field?

They don't prevent me from doing my job. It makes it harder. Oh no, I have to work harder.

Why is it wrong to want to make your job easier? I guess I don't see your point of view..

Re: Apple adds a tracker blocker to desktop Safari

#120

Post by tptacek »

om2 wrote: post #76
tptacek wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't.

Safari sandbox isn't identical to Chrome's but it's pretty effective. I don't think your statement is a fair one without qualification. ETA: we'd appreciate info about specific info wrong with Safari's sandboxing. We are definitely looking to improve it.

You work on the Apple Safari team. Are you really saying you feel like Safari's sandbox and anti-exploit features are comparable to those of Chrome? That would be a newsworthy claim.
Post reply on HN