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

How to fight back against Google FLoC

plausible.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 95 posts

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#51

Post by 8128js8121 »

notum wrote: post #9

Would I be terribly downvoted if I said that I prefer targeted ads? I'd rather see GPUs than feminine hygiene products. FLoC seems like a method of saving my preferences locally, which is fine. I'm not interested. I won't use Google's browsers and I'll continue to filter my traffic. Internet privacy will always be an uphill battle, there's worse things going on, starting with centralized and monopolized DNS, I feel w…

If you cant have kids, and you have done research on that topic, You then get targeted with products for children.

Its a fucking horrible thing to do to someone, Even if you try to opt out of family and that type of topic you still get them.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#52

Post by froh »

o_m wrote: post #31
eterevsky wrote: post #2

While I do understand that some people may not like it, I don't see how FLoC is particularly harmful. I've read several articles about it, and most of them just say something like "you are being put in a advertising cohort -- see how creepy it is", which doesn't really prove anything. One more specific argument against FLoC is that it will make help tracking users via fingerprinting. I don't really buy it. First of a…

It can be a death sentence in countries where homosexuality is illegal. Say you are FLoC branded as being LGBT (sort of like the pink triangle in nazi concentration camps) and you visit a government website, they will know about your sexuality and can arrest you.

Political tags are explicitly banned from the FLoC tagging data which identifies locally your 'secular', a-political preferences.

in contrast to that Facebook can identify you as LGBT+ today based off your likes and dislikes and shares.

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/4/1036

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#53

Post by eps »

notum wrote: post #9

Would I be terribly downvoted if I said that I prefer targeted ads? I'd rather see GPUs than feminine hygiene products. FLoC seems like a method of saving my preferences locally, which is fine. I'm not interested. I won't use Google's browsers and I'll continue to filter my traffic. Internet privacy will always be an uphill battle, there's worse things going on, starting with centralized and monopolized DNS, I feel w…

It's not about ads.

It's all about some random company building a detailed file on your person.

If you have trouble understanding it's an issue, imagine all physical businesses - restaurants, shops, taxis, barber shops, hospitals, postal service - recording all your visits, mugshots and all, and forwarding them to Moms Friendly Robots company, which knows exactly what you eat, shit, like to fuck and generally predisposed to do. They also sell this info to others, but that's really secondary.

What you are missing is that FLoC is basically a different vaseline flavor and you preferring it over the original is the biggest issue of it all - that, shokingly, you are OK with the rape to begin with.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#54

Post by sanxiyn »

andreareina wrote: post #44
sanxiyn wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like saying not sending Content-Security-Policy when it is needed to prevent XSS is not a security bug, since Chrome can start to ignore Content-Security-Policy (which it can). That is absurd.

That's more like the case with the Do Not Track header being defaulted to 1 in some browsers and many (most?) sites using that as an excuse to not honor it.

I think it is a good outcome too. If people really want relevant and targeted ads, they will opt-in to no-DNT and yes-FLoC. The fact that people don't, and that websites don't honor DNT, reveal their lies and hypocrisy.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#55

Post by sanxiyn »

ihuman wrote: post #49
sanxiyn wrote: post #12

I want to suggest another thing we can collaborate on. File bugs against Apache and nginx such that Apache and nginx emit Permission-Policy header by default. People who want FloC can opt-in, but since Pervasive Monitoring Is an Attack (RFC 7258), it is clearly severe security bugs in Apache and nginx that they don't emit this header by default. This may need CVE.

Why would Apache include the Permission-Policy header when they previously chose to ignore the "Do Not Track" header?

Because users want to? I would like to think Apache httpd project listens to their users.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#57

Post by ehnto »

eterevsky wrote: post #2

While I do understand that some people may not like it, I don't see how FLoC is particularly harmful. I've read several articles about it, and most of them just say something like "you are being put in a advertising cohort -- see how creepy it is", which doesn't really prove anything. One more specific argument against FLoC is that it will make help tracking users via fingerprinting. I don't really buy it. First of a…

> "you are being put in a advertising cohort -- see how creepy it is", which doesn't really prove anything.

Are you wanting proof for how it is harmful?

One possibility is that with a FLoC and a few other details, you can be fingerprinted as an individual not a cohort. So it's not effective at anonymizing the data advertisers are tracking from you.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#58

Post by Grumbledour »

jedwhite wrote: post #15

I'd recommend blocking FLoC on any websites you run. It is simple to do. Add this header to block FLoC: `permissions-policy: interest-cohort=()` See also this post on StackOverflow for information on how it adds a warning message in Chrome DevTools for browsers that aren't part of the current test [1] [1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/66997942/error-with-perm... Edit for typo.

Why should I bother though?

Privacy is really important to me, so I am not affected because I don't use chrome in the first place. All the people who use chrome, especially on this site, know damn well what they agreed to. You all already opted into this and everything google comes up with tomorrow. Why should I put in work to give you the warm fuzzy feeling of having staved of the google spying for another day? If you want protection from this, use another browser.

At this point, blocking this from the website level just seems to support google even more, because it takes the pressure from chrome users to actually start thinking and stop being victims.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#59

Post by jtsiskin »

mavhc wrote: post #27

"The web as we know it is evolving. Apple is pushing a privacy-first approach from its operating systems and Safari" Is that the Apple that uploads the MAC addresses of every device on your LAN and your GPS location without telling anyone?

A quick reading of Apples own advertising policy gives me deja vu...

“Segments We create segments, which are groups of people who share similar characteristics, and use these groups for delivering targeted ads. Information about you may be used to determine which segments you’re assigned to, and thus, which ads you receive. To protect your privacy, targeted ads are delivered only if more than 5,000 people meet the targeting criteria.”

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205223

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#60

Post by anfilt »

This is insane. So all sites with publicly routable IP addresses that a user visits are used for this cohort calculation! WTF

Every http server project should include the header by default to disable this, and even back port it for older versions as a critical security vulnerability update, since old sites with sensitive information will clearly be still serving content, and the DEVs may not even be working on the site anymore, and basically an IT guy is just updating software (hopefully...).

Post reply on HN