Cookies -

Discussion in 'privacy general' started by jfd15, Jun 7, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jfd15

    jfd15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    Hi,
    i thought i have read something recently about some newer cookies that
    are supposedly not easy to get rid of...ive heard of tracking cookies and "persistent" cookies only, so i am wondering what other cookies there could be?

    i currently use CCleaner and ATF Cleaner as well as the browser options
    to clear out cookies, cache, history, etc. and im wondering if anything is
    getting by me.....is there any chance that some sites could hide a cookie
    in another folder so that it wouldnt be detected and deleted by regular means?
    would windows vista UAC let this happen w/out the user knowing?
     
  2. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    CCleaner has recently upgraded their cookie cleaning features in some of its latest releases. I noticed that in the past if a cookie was not able to be cleaned CCleaner would still show it. I have not had any cookies unwanted get by a cleaning since the last couple CCleaner upgrades.
     
  3. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    CCleaner is one of the best cleaners around and it's free. There are much bigger problems than tracking cookies and MRU's, like invisible rootkits.
     
  4. jfd15

    jfd15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    yeah im just wondering though if they would hide cookies somewhere other than the cookie folder - the business people dont really want them cleared, wondering if they came up with another solution - i mean ive heard about cookies that were difficult to clear, but how could that be? it seems like if a program or the browser wanted to empty the cookie folder, it would be easy to do...


    wasnt meant to be a knock on CCleaner - i think its the best also....i complete these incentive freebie websites that give you iPods and Xboxes and Playstations and stuff like that - and if the cookies and cache arent cleared properly you dont always get credit for completing the offer....
     
  5. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    You may want to give the Piriform (Ccleaner) forum a try. They seem to actively answer questions over there.

    http://forum.piriform.com/
     
  6. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I know you didn't meant it that way. :)
    I clean my computer before Windows is even loaded. My assumption is when Windows isn't even loaded, it is also easier to remove superfluous objects without the protection of Windows. Of course I have no confirmation of this, it's just a theory. I have to test this to prove it, but I don't know how. It's not always easy to create a situation with hidden objects (cookies) or protected objects, whatever.
    I noticed in the past that sometimes certain objects can't be deleted, because Windows protects that object from being deleted. Somehow I think that this kind of protection is gone when Windows isn't loaded.
    Keep also in mind that cleaning isn't always a form of deletion. Lots of cleanings are done by replacing objects with a different content.

    Of course my solution isn't available anymore and I don't think it is possible with virtualization either, because it is a total different method. Virtualization has one disadvantage, it doesn't remember anything.
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2008
  7. spy1

    spy1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Posts:
    3,139
    Location:
    Clover, SC
    Let's see - he could be referring to this:

    http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/05/congressmen-ask.html

    or more likely this:

    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/07/phorms-all-seeing-parasite-cookie/ -

    "Phorm gets around these restrictions by piggybacking its cookies on the backs of those left by other sites. Phorm installs equipment at the I.S.P. that intercepts the user’s browser when it visits a Web site for the first time. It redirects the browser to Phorm’s own site. That way it can place and read its own cookie with a Phorm identification number. It then appends this number onto the cookie of the other site, say Google or Yahoo. It does this without the permission of that other site."

    I don't think there's an "anti-cookie" program out there that can protect you from this sort of tracking - not if your ISP is actively helping them hijack your web requests/internet connection.

    Supposedly, you can opt-out by accepting yet ANOTHER cookie (why doesn't that make me feel all warm-and-fuzzy?).

    And of course, both PHORM and NEBUAD insist that they're actually making things MORE private for you:

    http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/03/can-an-eavesdropper-protect-your-privacy/ Pete
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2008
  8. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    I'm personally not concerned with an opt in\out cookie. However, from the first link you posted, I am concerned about how NebuAd supposedly goes about their data collection\profiling.
    Of course, that's a much deeper subject than this cookie thread and best reserved for a more appropriate topic.
     
  9. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
  10. jfd15

    jfd15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    thanks for the ideas everyone...im not too worried about the privacy yet, but i think SPY1 is on to something....when i googled "getting rid of persistent cookies" or something like that, i found a forum for the people who design the cookies and the threads were from 2004 or so and they were seriously p.o.'d at the audacity of the browser companies putting in a clear cookies option -and they were complaining about Spyware companies that "didnt understand the role of cookies" and the "public needed to be educated" etc. etc....they didnt give a whit about anyone's privacy or security, all they cared about was tracking so they could make lots of $$$$..was kind of scary...



    hey acr, i see you over there on SD.....i call myself bezelbub there, lol...


    edit: jeez there it is right there in your first link also ACR:

    Better Privacy serves to protect against undeletable long-term cookies, a new generation of 'Super-Cookie', which silently conquered the internet. This new cookie generation offers unlimited user tracking to industry and market research. Concerning privacy 'Flash' and 'DOM Storage' -cookies are most critical.
    Flash-Cookies (Local Shared Objects) are pieces of information placed on your computer by a Flash plugin. Those Super-Cookies are placed in central system folders and so protected from deletion. They are frequently used like standard browser cookies. Although their thread potential is much higher as of conventional cookies, only few users began to take notice of them. It is of frequent occurrence that -after a time- hundreds of those cookies reside in special folders. And they won't be deleted - never! BetterPrivacy can stop them, e.g. by silently removing those cookies on every browser start. So this extension is sort of "install and forget add-on". Though the automatic deletion is absolutely safe (no negative impact on your browsing), it is still possible to review and delete new Flash-cookies manually. BetterPrivacy also protects against 'DOM Storage' longterm user tracking, a browser feature which has been granted by the major browser manufactures.


    i wonder how this add-on knows what to look for and where to look......
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2008
  11. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    OK. I will install extension "BetterPrivacy" also, just in case.
    Although I don't think it's necessary in a frozen system, where each change is removed, including unremovable, hidden objects.
    The only reason why I install "BetterPrivacy" is that I have no proof, they are removed in a frozen system.
     
  12. Huwge

    Huwge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Posts:
    405
    Location:
    UK
  13. jfd15

    jfd15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    BetterPrivacy found 13 of those "Super-Cookies" on my computer....others in their comment section said it found 100 or more on theirs
     
  14. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    Yes, but you probably don't have a frozen system. In a normal system everything is possible.

    EDIT:
    I had to register first and wait for an email.
    I have it installed now, but it didn't report anything, like I expected.
    Each time I reboot, I put Firefox back in an "unused" state and that means that Firefox only contains objects installed by Firefox and myself (= extensions) + configuration + cookies, I want to keep and that's it.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2008
  15. jfd15

    jfd15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA


    until a few months ago i was using NoScript and Flashblocker, SafeHistory, SafeCache - i cant use anything that blocks stuff in session though now or i wont get credits....


    what programs do you use for that Erik? Ghost or Acronis?
    i thought you said on another thread that you just re-install image from time to time and only takes 10 minutes.....
    right now takes me 3 hours or so to re-install OS....would like to see a thread on your method...

    how do you restore, from DVD's?
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2008
  16. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I'm not allowed to talk about my solution anymore in threads like this. ~Off topic comments removed.~
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 10, 2008
  17. Pedro

    Pedro Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2006
    Posts:
    3,502
    You managed to bring this up in a cookies thread? :D
     
  18. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    Flash cookies can be blocked by changing the flash player settings to not store any information, and the cookies can be cleared by going to the Macromedia-shared objects folder and manually deleting them.

    Dom storage can be turned off in Firefox by going to about:config and changing
    "dom.storage.enabled" to false. I have not done this and have no idea what effect this would have on browsing. Any experiences with this?

    I have tried BetterPrivacy and it seemed to work with no adverse effect, but I am a bit hesitant to use an add-on labeled experimental.

    Does anyone know where these DOM storage cookies are stored?
     
  19. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    I checked my firefox about:config and saw that I already had DOM set to false. I have not noticed anything unusual so far.
     
    Last edited: Jun 10, 2008
  20. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    Just a reminder that this discussion concerns "Cookies".

    Personal matters are best handled privately via the intended party or Wilders Forum staff member
     
  21. steve161

    steve161 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2006
    Posts:
    681
    Location:
    New York
    I have read that the dom storage objects can be found in the file webappsstore.sqlite in your Firefox folder. This was an empty file on my system, perhaps because of noscript, although I do allow top level sites by default. Btw, Firefox has dom.storage.enabled set to true (probably not for long).

    Edit: My dom.storage.setting is set to false in Ubuntu, probably because of BetterPrivacy, even though I removed it. When I checked before, I was using PCLOS.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2008
  22. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    Does that page contain some kind of software or something...somewhere. I didn't see anything like that.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.