BetterPrivacy vs Ghostery (LSOs)

The Firefox extension BetterPrivacy deletes Flash/Super cookies on exit. Ghostery also has an option in it's Advanced tab to supposedly do the same thing. So when it comes to LSOs, is it redundant to use both of these for this specific purpose, or does one do something the other doesn't?

 

BetterPrivacy is more extended and granular, you can also delete on browser start and time interval, notifications, whitelist etc. You can also delete settings.sol cookie(keeps a list of visited flash sites, but also any custom settings) and blocks click-pings.
If you enable it in Ghostery, Ghostery will also delete Silverlight cookies, BetterPrivacy does not.
I just noticed that BetterPrivacy's latest version is already 1.5 years old and the Devs website is MIA: netticat.ath.cx

 

Betterprivacy is more trustable, while Ghostery was clean in the past. The clean Ghostery addon had a different icon, where the blue figure had a straight profile, not so curved as the actual one. Betterprivacy is more a sytemwide cookies control and delete system, while Ghostery is a per-page addon that lists all the web bugs in it. More informative but nothing else that that.

 

Ad-Blocker Ghostery Actually Helps Advertisers, If You “Support” It

 

Like the article explains, GhostRank is opt-in and what most people seem to be forgetting, it was already in Ghostery long before Ghostery was acquired by Evidon. They also posted a reaction on the collected data, should you choose to opt-in:

 

I didn't say not to use it, but was simply drawing attention to the potential risk

 

I'd say better use some other tool as Targeted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out (Taco) or DoNotTrackMe (DNTMe).

Similar project to Ghostery seems to be 'Disconnect', not tried by myself yet.

 

I use Ghostery, Taco/Abine, Disconnect, DNTMe and a whole host of others

They all seem to play nicely together and, although it makes access a trifle slower, I feel happier that I have a belt and braces solution

Added to which, however much slower it makes my browser pales into insignificance compared to the amount of time it takes to go through NoScript and RequestPolicy

 

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply you were saying not to use it, just pointing out in advance what quite a few people and websites tend to overlook when they're writing about Ghostery and ghostrank/the new owner.

 

NP - Like you, I was just clarifying my intent

 

NS & RP actually make my browsing significantly quicker due to a ton of elements being blocked that would otherwise load on a page.

Ghostery on the other hand noticeably slowed down my browsing experience. Once every 10 minutes or so my CPU would spike and I didn't know what was causing it. It stopped after I removed Ghostery, making the answer quite obvious. Plus I just don't trust it anymore. And CS Lite makes half of it's job redundant anyway. And ABP is mostly overlap with the other half.

BetterPrivacy is pretty much obsolete now that Firefox handles Flash cookies just like any other cookie now, but used to be a great addon and part of my arsenal.

 

True, but then I have to go through the list and enable those bits that are required; and, whilst the usual culprits are obvious, often enough, when I'm on some site I've never been to before, it's not and can take an age before I figure out the exact minimum combination required to have it function properly

Swings and roundabouts, I suppose; and at least the effort rewards me with knowledge (gained with time) which things are undesirable and which sites make use of such undesirables

I'll disable it and see what I think

I'm in two minds, but, yes, I share your disquiet

I like the belt and braces approach; especially as I can't know from version to version which addons will be broken

 

Yeah, it really depends on the end users usage. To me that's not a problem at all. I only browse about a dozen sites, pretty much a set routine when I hop on here. It's rare that I ever have to allow scripts or cookies for anything. For instance, I'm logged on here and talking to you without having to allow either. And the same can be said at pretty much every site I use. The only exceptions are really checking my email, watching Youtube videos, or buying from Amazon. So no hassle here.

If I were routinely checking out new sites and having to allow scripts for functionality and there was a huge list there of them to pick from... well, actually, I would probably leave the site immediately to be honest, because that's shady looking to me. But yeah, then that'd become problematic as an end user.