How to fight back against Google FLoC • Hacker News Board

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#61

Post by eterevsky » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 6:57 AM UTC

kemonocode wrote: post #7

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…

> While I do understand that some people may not like it, I don't see how FLoC is particularly harmful. Sure, I can give an example: it goes beyond simple basic fingerprinting, it allows you to be associated with a group of "others" (your cohort) in ways that can be dangerous to you. Suppose you live in a country where you may not enjoy certain freedoms or some behaviors may be outlawed; end up in the wrong cohort(s)…

As someone who lived in such country and has a lot of friends who still live there, I wouldn't care about it too much. The governments of such countries are usually not interested in find every single citizen who's interested in some topic. What they are interested in is suppressing people who are promoting "wrong" values. And you don't need a vague advertising identifier to find such people.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#62

Post by ellinoora » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 6:59 AM UTC

Plausible tracks visitors without their permission. This is illegal in Europe where notice or consent or is needed, regardless of how cookies are used/not used.

More info: https://volument.com/learn/data-privacy

Note that I work at Volument.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#63

Post by jedwhite » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:05 AM UTC

Grumbledour wrote: post #58

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 y…

If you run any websites, you should do this because, although YOU might not use Chrome yourself, your website visitors often do.

When websites block FLoC, the activity of their users on those websites are not available to Google's Cohort Assignment Algorithm.

It's not about your personal privacy as the individual website operator. It's about your customers' privacy as visitors to your website.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#64

Post by dmitriid » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:05 AM UTC

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?

The Do Not Track ended up being used for tracking and identifying users. Support for it is now removed even from Safari, https://webkit.org/tracking-prevention/

> Removed the Do Not Track flag, which ironically was used as a fingerprinting vector, adding uniqueness to the users who had enabled it.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#65

Post by alichapman » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:10 AM UTC

ellinoora wrote: post #62

Plausible tracks visitors without their permission. This is illegal in Europe where notice or consent or is needed, regardless of how cookies are used/not used. More info: https://volument.com/learn/data-privacy Note that I work at Volument.

Does this change anything that the author has said? You haven't commented on whether or not you agree with them, you've just (rightly or wrongly) attacked their character.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#66

Post by LimaBearz » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:11 AM UTC

babypuncher wrote: post #23

sanxiyn wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point is right now. Chrome is spyware, clear and simple.

Chrome has always been spyware. I have no idea why anybody uses it.

I remember cause I refused to switch. When it first came out the argument was “it’s faster than Firefox”. I never got what that meant. What... a 200ms load time on Firefox was 180ms on chrome? Wow let me switch to skynet’s chrome! Pass

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#67

Post by ksec » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:11 AM UTC

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?

My question, how is Google FloC different to Apple's Differential Privacy?

Why is everyone championing Apple while shooting down Google if they are doing the same thing.

Unless I am mistaken, I am reading a lot of double standards from people on the issue.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#68

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:13 AM UTC

ksec wrote: post #67

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?

My question, how is Google FloC different to Apple's Differential Privacy? Why is everyone championing Apple while shooting down Google if they are doing the same thing. Unless I am mistaken, I am reading a lot of double standards from people on the issue.

[deleted]

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#69

Post by simion314 » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:13 AM UTC

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…

>Would I be terribly downvoted if I said that I prefer targeted ads? I'd rather see GPUs than feminine hygiene products.

Would you be OK with an opt-in solution? If you want to be tracked and get "good" ads you install a browser extension and now you get your ads and now everyone is happy.

Re: How to fight back against Google FLoC

#70

Post by rich_sasha » Fri, Apr 16, 2021, 7:15 AM UTC

I hate the data-grabbing business model as much as the next hacker. Equally, I feel reluctant to burn with the holy wrath of anger. It is, and has been, no secret that this is how Google works. They give you great services for 0 money and all your data. What’s unclear or unethical about it? Take it or leave it.

What bothers me much more is Google’s et al crushing dominance over the competition, meaning that whatever shenanigans they come up with end up forced on {m,b}illions of users. This, and the sneaky hiding of data grabbing in “consent” boxes or 100 page ToS docs.