Ghostery 7 is Here

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Rasheed187, Sep 8, 2016.

  1. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
  2. TairikuOkami

    TairikuOkami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Posts:
    2,509
    Location:
    Slovakia
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2016
  3. haakon

    haakon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2015
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    SW USA
    Nope. Two days after that blog posted it's still just for Chrome according to their download-browser-extension page and the addons dot mozilla page.

    Not that there's any hurry...
     
  4. Overkill

    Overkill Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Posts:
    2,134
    Location:
    USA
    Would it be at all useful to add alongside ublocko?
     
  5. chrome_sturmen

    chrome_sturmen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    785
    Location:
    Sverige
    not sure - it displays a (customizable) popup showing the elements it's blocked - I use it with adblock plus, and it still blocks things based on the popups I receive - ublock may cover trackers moreso than adblock plus though, i'd say give it a try
    (only shows said popup if you choose it to do so)
     
  6. Overkill

    Overkill Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Posts:
    2,134
    Location:
    USA
    I am wondering...when I get an extension error (usually two extensions wanting to redirect a network request) is it because other extensions (in my case avira browser safety and ublocko) are also blocking the same trackers or is it something else causing it? It was also happening with ghostery at times.
     
  7. chrome_sturmen

    chrome_sturmen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    785
    Location:
    Sverige
    not sure - I only use a few basic extensions
    you could try using only one extension that you know blocks trackers, use it long enough to see if there are any errors, then slowly enable your other extensions one by one, wouldn't take but a few days
     
  8. MisterB

    MisterB Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    1,103
    Location:
    Southern Rocky Mountains USA
    I removed it from Vivaldi when I found that it connected to the Ghostery website to change settings with a frame in the extension and my script blocker was preventing it from doing so. There is no easy option to prevent extensions from updating themselves like in Firefox so I can't install the previous version and keep it. The writing was on the wall when version 6 for Firefox came out. Ghostery is now phoning home and that defeats its whole purpose. I'll have to rely on uBlock origin and uMatrix for what Ghostery used to do. For Opera 12 and Firefox, I'll keep using an older version as long as it still performs its basic function.
     
  9. chrome_sturmen

    chrome_sturmen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    785
    Location:
    Sverige
    doesn't ghostery have an opt out option ?
     
  10. ghodgson

    ghodgson Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2003
    Posts:
    784
    Location:
    UK
    Version 7 is dreadful.
    The large 'purple box' pop up notifier of trackers pops up on every webpage regardless of whether trackers are present or not and even on whitelisted sites. It is extremely intrusive and distracting.
    OK the pop up can be disabled - but in the old version the notification box was unobtrusive and could be glanced at to assess what trackers etc are being blocked, so disabling it sort of defeats the object.
    Some users are also saying that the new version seems to have - SyntaxError: Unexpected token = (at panel.js)
    The whitelist and settings are now kept remotely and not locally as before hence it's calling home.
    Other options have also gone such as deleting flash and Silverlight cookies.
    I uninstalled it straight away and let them at Ghostery know why I uninstalled it.
    Version 7 is getting absolutely slated in the reviews at Chrome App store.

    Gordon
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2016
  11. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,088
    From Other Features:
    That sounds like a positive course correction. However, the related Youtube video showed someone who did have an account using the Export Settings feature and the narrator said "If you are not interested in creating an account, you can still export and import your Ghostery preferences locally. Click Expert Settings to download a dot ghost file of your preferences. ...". Emphasis mine. If settings were stored locally they wouldn't have to be downloaded. However, they may mean download in the sense of using a download oriented browser API to get local settings in the browser out of it and into a local settings file. That' something I would investigate.

    From Enhanced Features for Account Holders section:
    In general, I'd like to see more private sync options. As in the ability to sync through one's own local or remote server. However, as long as all settings can be kept local and the export/import feature keeps things private, there are options for those who don't want to sync through Ghostery servers.

    For each of the last three: This seems like something that could be done purely client side. What is the justification for requiring an account? Is it because there is related phone home? Someone needs to look for that, and if found, determine how revealing it is.

    I'm most concerned about the "Detected URLs for each tracker", because many "tracker" URLs contain unique identifiers and/or other bits of sensitive/revealing information. You wouldn't want that sent to Ghostery, or anyone else for that matter.
     
  12. CloneRanger

    CloneRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2006
    Posts:
    4,833
    I stopped using it as the later "updates" kept wanting to phone home. My FW was continually blocking DATA out attempts ! Plus i didn't like the newer versions having the log on "feature" to edit/update either !

    Why do vendors more often than not, make things worse. Stooooopid !
     
  13. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    689
    Heres my experience with ghostery:

    A year or two ago I'd installed their extension but afterwards, when Id learned about their controversial past I ditched them, even though I concede their extension was informative and easy to understand and use at that time. I wouldn't trust them now AT ALL especially in the direction they're moving with the phoning home stuff. I'd never believe any backtracking or statements of goodwill from this company, and that it wasn't for some sneaky purpose. A company who places themselves in between ad companies and end users and then catering to both has, at BEST, got to be questionable.

    That said, earlier this year I wanted to test some things out and thought to try Ghostery in a portable browser for that purpose. As always, I install stuff OFFLINE and with extensions that means getting the xpi file and importing it manually. WELL, what a mission that was with all sorts of phoning home attempts and the program was crippled with no control panel whatsoever. The idea was you had to go online and fill out your settings on their website. I thought what craziness is this? NO THANKS people - I want to able to control things at MY END and any updates initiated by ME. With all the wrangling with that and searching online it brought me to a thread on dslreports where posters were having a spat when ghostery 6 came out. What I took away from that was that they'd brought in this strange template idea which I still cant understand. I finally got an earlier xpi with the control panel, but I had to do all sorts of stuff to get it to work because of dregs leftover from the later install. You are supposedly still able to update the database with the earlier version but why would I trust this company after pulling a stunt like that. NO THANKS.
     
  14. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,046
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Thanks for the feedback guys. So seems like Ghostery 7 is just as bad as version 6. I'm sticking to v5, and perhaps I will completely dump it, because I also don't fully trust these guys. Seems like their motives are a bit shady. Too bad, because it was a cool tool, and I didn't like competing products like Privacy Badger, DoNotTrackMe and Disconnect.
     
  15. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    689
    Yea there's no denying the tool was handy and informative, but when their business model is shady to start with and they employ crazy stuff like that you just got to decide. PB didn't cut it for me. Not enough control. Sites do NOT have to observe DNT and the trouble with that is you don't easily know whether they do or not. Disconnect doesn't do anything that you can't achieve in uBlockOrigen and uMatrix which take some time to learn, and sure, and I'm still doing that, but that's what you have to do if you want to stop this nonsense.

    One other thing, whoever heard of an extension itself that was functionally crippled unless it called home. :thumbd: Is this a first? I've never heard of it before.
     
  16. MisterB

    MisterB Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2013
    Posts:
    1,103
    Location:
    Southern Rocky Mountains USA
    This is also the first extensions that was blocked by my script blocker because it was loading html and javascript from a server in its configuration page.
     
  17. TheWindBringeth

    TheWindBringeth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2012
    Posts:
    2,088
    FWIW, I question if we have sufficient feedback from people who have explicitly tested/inspected version 7. But that's not why I'm replying...

    Not to imply that ABP is the best way to go or that every user would take advantage of this feature, but:

    ABP has an Open Blockable Items feature which displays information for items on the page. In a color-coded table format, but you can also hover over entries for a popup summary and right click for edit/add filter functionality. You can see information such as address/URL, type of resource, applicable filter (if there is a match), whether the item was or wasn't blocked, and whether the item is first or third party. This type of summary/overview is extremely useful. You can open the panel and leave it open as you visit sites of interest, in order to quickly assess the situation at those sites. Inspecting the full URL of resources is often crucial to judging whether a resource is safe to retrieve, and the full URLs are right there for you to see (mouse hover over ones that are ... shortened).

    I think this TYPE of feature is something that would benefit many users. Including visitors who might not be comfortable interpreting things on their on. Observing what was blocked and why (the matching filter communicates why) would help them to learn to recognize threats. Other extensions *should* provide something similar, but I don't know all those that do/don't. Since blocking tools can miss things, I would look for a tool that lists not only what was blocked but also what wasn't blocked. So you can scan the latter list and hopefully spot items which snuck past.
     
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016
  18. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    726
    FWIW, uBlock Origin has a very powerful logger which not only shows everything blocked and allowed but can also be used to create static and dynamic filters.
     
  19. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    2,883
    Location:
    Australia
    For anyone who's interested, the FF version just updated to 7.0.0.113.

    EDIT: And now it isn't blocking anything at all.
     
  20. haakon

    haakon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2015
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    SW USA
    Cyberfox Intel x64 Portable 48.0.2 - Win7-SP1x64 - Ghostery 7.0.0.113

    Ghostery7blocks.jpg
     
  21. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    2,883
    Location:
    Australia
    Perhaps it doesn't work with one of my extension.

    Here are my extensions.

    NOTE - I have just uninstalled Ghostery and replaced it with Privacy Badger. They were never installed together.

    Cyberfox Extensions.PNG
     
  22. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    2,883
    Location:
    Australia
    On another machine after updating Ghostery, disabling ABP (just in case), restarting FF and going to youtube + other sites known for tracking and Ghostery still wasn't blocking anything. Going to Advance Settings shows this.

    Ghostery.PNG

    Removed and replaced with Privacy Badger on three machines.
     
  23. haakon

    haakon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2015
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    SW USA
    @Krusty13

    Wow. That is just plain weird.

    So, you don't get anything when you click that little "Show All Trackers" arrow on the Categories bar??

    GhosteryCategories.jpg

    I was going to suggest you disable ABP but you already made that call.

    For that screenie in my #20 above, I disabled the Adguard extension because, like ABP, it acts "ahead of" Ghostery.

    With Adguard enabled, for that same Web site it snags 19 and Ghostery three. Although on most sites the ratio isn't quite that high. Ghostery is great at taking up ad blocker slack.

    Ghostery&adguardBlocks.jpg

    But Privacy Badger is darn good, too. However, if one is in the habit of clearing cookies every ten minutes (I have a toolbar button for it), it doesn't do much good in the long run.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2016
  24. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    2,883
    Location:
    Australia
    Yep, it said something like, "no trackers found".

    I didn't realise the Adguard extension was free. I thought you needed to buy a license for Adguard. Maybe I should give that a try?
     
  25. haakon

    haakon Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2015
    Posts:
    767
    Location:
    SW USA
    Absolutely on Adguard. I've been using it for about five months after using ABP for over 10 years. Started with McDonald's pioneering work. And then Palant's v0.6 I think it was; as much as I admire the man, I'm stuck on Adguard. It also has phishing and malware protection which can be disabled if one is so inclined.

    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/adguard-adblocker/ Go for it.

    These are the filters I use:

    AdguardFilters.jpg

    The first six are Adguard authored but their Social media filter is a bit lacking so I threw in Fanboy's. Yes, any ABP list can be used in the Adguard extension.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2016
Loading...