Honey Browser Extension is too invasive but...

Honey Browser Extension
https://www.joinhoney.com/

Supposedly it finds the cheapest prices & applies the best coupons automatically. I certainly think it searches more places for coupons & prices than I can. But it has access to all browsing history & is owned by PayPal. I find that creepy.

So I have a question. Suppose I install it & have it disabled in Browser extensions/add-ons until I am checking out on a purchase.

How much browsing history & other info will Honey glean from my PC? Or am I wasting my time & PayPal already know all my browsing history?

 

It's fine if you disbable it

 

Sorry what do you mean by fine it'll work? Because I know extensions when re-enabled work.

 

I would think that would be a good idea as long as you delete your browsing history before re-enabling the extension/add-on but it's only speculation. Hopefully the more experienced will chime in.

 

That's a good idea. And yes, "...Hopefully the more experienced will chime in."

 

Not experienced but multi containers on firefox would help or use a portable firefox install just when you want to use it.

 

to read
https://www.joinhoney.com/privacy
https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/9/2...-security-risk-paypal-acquisition-competition

honey now belongs to paypal.

 

That's the problem with extensions, most of them have way too many permissions. So you either trust them or not, it's a shame that browser makers still haven't tackled this problem.

 

It's free, it's owned by PayPal. It's bound to be creepily keeping track.

 

OP here. I'm using Vivaldi based on Chromium.

Disabling the extension when not in use or any other way to limit the Honey extension permissions & still have it function as a money saver?

 

Now that I think of it, that's actually a great idea. Extensions should only work on certain sites, perhaps you can configure the Honey extension in this way? Actually, it can be done by Vivaldi also, go to extenions and click on "details" and then "site access".

 

You are awesome! Installed & allowed access only to Honey's owner's site so far. We'll see how this works.

When I shop I'll add that site & then maybe remove it after. I just don't want Honey following me around on non-shopping sites.

I'll give it a go & see if it saves me any money.

 

It can be done by Chromium browser. No idea about Firefox
https://www.howtogeek.com/fyi/how-t... click the extension,work until you click it.

 

For now I'll stick with whitelisting specific sites even though the click option seems easier.

 

the idea behind accessing page data is that extensions need to know if they should be triggered or not. if you limit extensions to pages they cant be triggered on other pages, in this case if you limit honey to its author domain it wont work on amazon or other pages and has no benefit. thats same as disabled.

accessing page data is mandatory, same for storage (which ofc means tracking users behavior), what i consider as trivial is access to bookmarks or history

 

I think you're reading different than I wrote.

 

I misread this as Honey Badger extension. Oh man, wouldn't it be awesome if there was one, and it was narrated by that dude Randall, and when you go to a bad site, it ignores all the security warnings and says: Honey Badger don't care, Honey Badget don't give a ****, it browses what it wants.

I'll see myself out.

Mrk

 

yes, idd i did. i am not sure when this option has been added. but i remember the choice last days. thank you for pointing it out.

 

OMG I read that a second time and now I'm laughing even harder.

 

If nothing else you could go to the extensions privacy policy page and decide for yourself if you agree with what they're saying or not. I almost installed the new Microsoft Edge but after reading its very long privacy policy I decided against it.

 

Yes, I totally forgot about this feature. But I do still think that browsers should be designed in a way that they are capable of restricting extensions even more. For example, sort of like a sandbox within the browser that can limit the rights of extensions.

 

firefox runs extensions already as IL low.
use about:memory and compare PID with any taskmanager.

from my view extensions need several rights to work otherwise they may fail.
but some extensions request to many rights, thats also true.
also to say that official extensions had a manual review. there is a qualified personal working [for us]. and addons have a feedback channel for any doubt or suggestions!

anyhow - dont trust it? uninstall!

i tried this with "awesome screenshot" - and it always need a page reload. not usefull. i think its same with honey.
i did not not try the option "on [domainname]" so i dont know if this list is cumulative or only one specific entry.

 

Good advice Brummelchen Just thought of one other suggestion. Maybe you could go to alternativeto.net and type in your extensions name and see if there is other similiar extensions who knows maybe you can find an open source one.

 

BTW, I was thinking about this subject, and it seems that eventhough extensions are not active on sites, they are still active in browser memory. So this makes me wonder, are they then still able to track you? Or are they truly disabled, this would be interesting to know.

 

This is news from months ago, but shocking to see how these so called trustworthy extensions are not always what they seem. PayPal should be ashamed of themselves.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/12/23...xtension-scam-influencers-affiliate-marketing