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

Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

brave.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 329 posts

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#231

Post by lolinder »

FractalHQ wrote: post #55
JohnFen wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I certainly do. That said, I struggle to find another browser that's any better and most are worse. So I accept Firefox as the lesser evil.

Brave browser is such an obvious win for me… chrome + privacy. None of the bugs and missing features that come with Safari or Firefox.

The fact that it's Chrome is the problem with Brave. What you call "bugs and missing features" I call necessary diversity to avoid Google dominating the standardization process more than they already do.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#232

Post by lolinder »

EasyMark wrote: post #114
JonChesterfield wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shed a tear for the Firefox that could have been

Kind of wondering what you’re talking about here? Firefox still works great for me, did I miss something in the news? Is there some sort of big change coming down the pipeline?

Not OP, but Firefox didn't have to lose nearly all its market share to Chrome. Mozilla could have course corrected and righted the ship, but instead they got distracted on dozens of unrelated and often controversial projects and ended up burning most of their credibility.

Mozilla is a husk of what it could have been, and that's hurt Firefox.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#233

Post by USiBqidmOOkAqRb »

chgs wrote: post #222
XlA5vEKsMISoIln wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> API necessarily provides at least the data point of, "Did they select an option in the permission notification?" If a bird app (or, heck, pancake recipe site) asked for WebRTC or GPU access I would be rightfully suspicious. It's a shame these things don't happen.

They do ask for location data, and it tends to mostly work - sites like openstreetmap will ask for it when you press the right button for example, which makes sense. There is a risk that it ends up like cookie banners, and the adtech industry manages to brainwash the world into thinking that the government is the bad guy and they just want some harmless data to share with their 1,345 best friends and they are “forced…

This is a poorly explored avenue. I think a lot of these more advanced APIs ought to be permitted to "installed" PWAs. Maybe it could even look like permissions menu for apps in phone OSes.

I was a bit dismayed when mozillians in the bugtracker dismissed the idea of requiring consent to initialize WebRTC. F'k it, scan the local network.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#234

Post by Aperocky »

JonChesterfield wrote: post #16
cabbageicefruit wrote: post #11

Damn. If there was ever any doubt about why you should get off chrome, this seems to put an end to that.

Shed a tear for the Firefox that could have been

Firefox is working just fine for me, not sure why people seemed to think that it was a problem.

I think Mozilla is poorly managed and feature may have been slow or "lagging behind". But for me the lack of those shiny new things might as well be a feature than a bug.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#235

Post by radlad »

willywanker wrote: post #176
radlad wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brave has received negative press for diverting ad revenue from websites to itself,[30] collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent,[43] suggesting affiliate links in the address bar[49] and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent.[58] These are the primary issues I hear about regarding Brave on this forum. It's also founded by Brendan Eich who was forced out of Mozi…

He was opposed to it as a private citizen, not as Mozilla CEO. His beliefs and supported causes as the former are nobody else's concern; had he been discriminating in terms of employment or otherwise making public statements it would be a different story. Or are we now witch hunting people for wrongthink?

I don't think it's "witch hunting people for wrongthink" to suggest that those in a position of power are able to use that power to influence public opinion.

Especially when that position of power is the CEO of a browser that replaces content on web pages.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#237

Post by [deleted] »

svieira wrote: post #5

> We conducted a user study with 30 Web users, recruited over social media, and presented them each with 20 pairs of websites. Website pairs were randomly selected from both the Related Website Sets list (i.e., sites Google designates as “related”, and so warranting reduced privacy protections), and the Tranco list of popular websites. Each user was presented with different pairs of websites, asked to view the sites,…

[deleted]

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#238

Post by radlad »

bad_user wrote: post #158
radlad wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Brave has received negative press for diverting ad revenue from websites to itself,[30] collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent,[43] suggesting affiliate links in the address bar[49] and installing a paid VPN service without the user's consent.[58] These are the primary issues I hear about regarding Brave on this forum. It's also founded by Brendan Eich who was forced out of Mozi…

> "collecting unsolicited donations for content creators without their consent" Those "donations" were from handouts of BAT. What they "collected" was their own BAT that they've donated to users of Brave. And it wasn't long lived. At least they've been trying to create a business model that's privacy preserving and that benefits content creators. Firefox has been selling their users to Google for years. > "suggesting…

Most of your comment amounts to whataboutism. Many of the counter-examples you point out are also problematic!

> > "suggesting affiliate links in the address bar"

> You mean like what Firefox also did?

Firefox did experiment with "Sponsored" results in the URL bar but they did not rewrite URLs to include affiliate links, which is also harmful to privacy: https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/gybv0e/brave_br...

> I've never seen a VPN service installed with Brave. Is this a Windows thing? If you're talking about the VPN functionality in Brave itself, isn't this what Firefox also did?

Yes, this was a Windows thing: https://www.ghacks.net/2023/10/18/brave-is-installing-vpn-se...

Are you referring to the Mozilla VPN that is a separate download? https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/products/vpn/download/

> For me, these were never reasons to avoid Firefox, but seeing that this is how the world works now, maybe they should be.

Yes, you are absolutely entitled to "vote with your money" (or free usage / market share, as the case may be.) Boycotts are an integral component of free speech and self-expression.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#239

Post by cyanydeez »

autoexec wrote: post #125
codedokode wrote: post #85

Have been using Firefox for a long time, no issues, though long ago when I had little memory, Chrome was using less of it. Firefox also has HTTPS-only mode, encrypted DNS without fallbacks, supports SOCKS and Encrypted Client Hello (although almost no website support it). However, it is better to just buy more memory (unless you are lucky to use Apple products). Regarding analytics, I believe browsers should take use…

> Regarding analytics, I believe browsers should take user's side and do not cooperate with marketing companies Browsers were supposed to act as agents working for the user. User-agents. These days it's getting harder and harder to find a browser that doesn't work for an ad company at the expense of the user. Chrome's entire reason for existing is data collection. Firefox can, for now at least, be hardened to work fo…

Power balance is how relationships always evolve. Browsers are basically politicians at this point and they are easily swayed by the power of the dollar and have varying degrees of requirements to side with the users.

Google, of course, has rammed chrome into it's primary place.

Re: Chrome is entrenching third-party cookies that will mislead users

#240

Post by dotancohen »

pwdisswordfishz wrote: post #182
bluejekyll wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that is not the entire point of DoH. That’s like saying the entire point of TLS is to prevent users from looking at the traffic being sent to a website. DNS without DoH, DoT, or DoQ, is wide open to anyone snooping traffic in the raw, that’s not necessarily information you want to share with the world.

> That’s like saying the entire point of TLS is to prevent users from looking at the traffic being sent to a website. In the case of mobile apps, it is.

Can you clarify that statement?
Post reply on HN