Live data from Hacker News

Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

tech.slashdot.org

121–130 of 346 posts

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#121

I dont yet understand this attack. The WP article says: "" Millions of websites contain a string of computer code from Meta that compiles your web activity. It might capture the income you report to the government, your application for a student loan and your online shopping. "" If I read that correctly then they are capturing all https web content you access in clear text and uploads it all to Meta? Then Meta I thou…

It does sound fantastical. A piece of code that can violate the same origin policy would be a huge vulnerability. Meta could be working with other sites to share data on users via code running on both sites, but snooping on tax data without the IRS helping? Unlikely.

I can only assume they're suggesting that companies like Intuit and H&R Block are sharing this data with Meta, but that seems like a huge violation of privacy and with tax data it might even be illegal.

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A media outlet which depends on ad revenue as a primary income source is unlikely to suggest this. Ditching these deeply invasive products remains a good idea, independent on any decision to use ad blockers or not. The Meta/Yandex incident in particular is straight-up malware and everyone should remove their apps.

> which depends on ad revenue They're more tightly bound than that. They're dependent on Google Display Ads. Which really makes their whole diatribe that much more pathetic. Any media company that decided to traffic the ads themselves, from their own servers, and inline with their own content, would effectively be immune from ad blocking. > Ditching these deeply invasive products remains a good idea While still allow…

It’s odd that orgs like NYT don’t run their own ad services. I’m sure they have a dedicated department for ad sales for physical copies. They’re large enough that companies would work directly with them. And they would have at least some editorial control on what is displayed on their site.

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which depends on ad revenue They're more tightly bound than that. They're dependent on Google Display Ads. Which really makes their whole diatribe that much more pathetic. Any media company that decided to traffic the ads themselves, from their own servers, and inline with their own content, would effectively be immune from ad blocking. > Ditching these deeply invasive products remains a good idea While still allow…

It’s odd that orgs like NYT don’t run their own ad services. I’m sure they have a dedicated department for ad sales for physical copies. They’re large enough that companies would work directly with them. And they would have at least some editorial control on what is displayed on their site.

The NYT does have a direct-sold ads business and first-party data platform for targeting them: https://open.nytimes.com/to-serve-better-ads-we-built-our-ow...

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#124
What about the other app ? Now that this trick is known, either it’s completely fixed, including in system webview, or all the other usual spyware ,that the play store is full of, are going to use it to track their user.

Google still hasn’t fixed the issue of app being able to list all other installed app on your phone without requiring permission despite having been reported months ago. They didn’t even provide an answer.

I believe Google isn’t interested in Android user privacy in any way, even when it’s to their own benefit.

At this point either use iPhone, grapheneos or no phone at all.

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which depends on ad revenue They're more tightly bound than that. They're dependent on Google Display Ads. Which really makes their whole diatribe that much more pathetic. Any media company that decided to traffic the ads themselves, from their own servers, and inline with their own content, would effectively be immune from ad blocking. > Ditching these deeply invasive products remains a good idea While still allow…

It’s odd that orgs like NYT don’t run their own ad services. I’m sure they have a dedicated department for ad sales for physical copies. They’re large enough that companies would work directly with them. And they would have at least some editorial control on what is displayed on their site.

That used to be how print newspapers worked.

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#127
post #96
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the spy protocol (http) I'm afraid I can't guess your reasoning.

How do i turn it off?

Turn what off? HTTP is how you receive the web page in the first place. It is not, in itself, causing data to be sent from your computer to others. That happens either because of a script on the page or because you request a web page (i.e. the browser sends headers).

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#128
post #28

I've noticed that recent Chrome version does not allow me to download the pdf I'm viewing. I had to open it in Firefox. The Chrome browser only allowed me to save it to drive (cloud)

I have the opposite problem: I want to simply render the pdfs so I can, you know, read them. not download them like they are data to be fed into another app.

Re: Washington Post's Privacy Tip: Stop Using Chrome, Delete Meta Apps (and Yandex)

#130
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chrome is fine. Letting an advertising company own it is not.

I feel like that's like saying "it's fine, except for the bad part that you can't avoid" ;)

The DOJ could literally order their separation. So there's no part of this that's "unavoidable." Ask Ma Bell.
Post reply on HN