Help EFF Test Privacy Badger, Our New Tool to Stop Creepy Online Tracking

Discussion in 'privacy technology' started by Dermot7, May 2, 2014.

  1. Dermot7

    Dermot7 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Posts:
    3,196
    Location:
    Surrey, England.
    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/04/privacy-badger
    http://www.ghacks.net/2014/05/02/block-online-tracking-privacy-badger-firefox-chrome/
     
  2. trott3r

    trott3r Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    UK
    hmm everything seems to be classified as red but in its FAQ it says everything should start off green.
     
  3. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
    I ran a comparative benchmark this morning with other popular privacy-enhancing extensions.

    Results on github: https://github.com/gorhill/httpswit...-Top-15-Most-Popular-News-Websites#may-2-2014

    Results on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7685899

    My warning to people using a Chromium-based browser: the chrome API allows only one extension to modify inbound or outbound headers. Since Privacy Badger modifies outbound headers, it will "break" other extensions already installed which try to do the same (this includes mine, HTTP Switchboard), or other extensions which modify oubound HTTP headers will "break" Privacy Badger if this one was installed before the other interfering extension.

    EDIT: I dug a bit more to understand all the possible conflicts between the extensions, and these are the details: https://github.com/gorhill/httpswit...-and-other-extensions#privacy-badger-from-eff
     
    Last edited: May 3, 2014
  4. Morthawt

    Morthawt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Posts:
    79
    Location:
    UK
    Glad I read this. I have installed it in Chrome. Will this do anything different than "Disconnect", "DoNotTrackMe" or "Ghostry"? Or is it more of a complementary thing in addition.
     
  5. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    That´s the key question of course, it´s probably a "me too" product, but that doesn´t mean it´s a bad thing. :)
     
  6. Morthawt

    Morthawt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Posts:
    79
    Location:
    UK
    Well I am using "DoNotTrackMe, Adblock Plus, Privacy Badger, WOT" as my primary extensions.
     
  7. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    I don't know about the name though. "Privacy Badger"? ok.

    I'll try it.

    edit

    This is looking to be pretty good.
     
    Last edited: May 2, 2014
  8. funkydude

    funkydude Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    6,852
    ABP + EasyPrivacy = this without the nonsense and wasted effort.
     
  9. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    So it's been a few days since I've installed it and I haven't had any issues. I have noticed though that the usual tracking/spyware cookies I'd get which would be picked up by various AV/Malware scanners have basically stopped. That's pretty big to me and I'm pretty happy.
     
  10. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,029
    I've found the same. Initially, everything gets through. But it learns as you browse, and gradually blocks more and more. As the developers say, that's good because it blocks based on behavior, not through black/white lists.

    However, I still don't like ads, even the ones that don't track :(
     
  11. Tarnak

    Tarnak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2007
    Posts:
    3,875
    Not for me, since I only use Opera. :(
     
  12. ronjor

    ronjor Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Posts:
    57,740
    Location:
    Texas
  13. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    5,060

    http://threatpost.com/privacy-badger-extension-blocks-tracking-through-social-icons
     
  14. Veeshush

    Veeshush Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2014
    Posts:
    643
    I'm still using it. I really haven't had any major issues with it breaking sites, even though it's still early development. It's been great. :thumb:
     
  15. gorhill

    gorhill Developer

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2013
    Posts:
    747
    Location:
    Canada
    I included in my benchmark today, given the hype surrounding it. Let's not mince words: It performed abysmally.

    https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/µBlock-and-others:-Blocking-ads,-trackers,-malwares

    I say "absymally" because on top of the poor blocking power for a so-called "ad-smashing" extension, Chromium keeps warning that "[t]his extension is slowing down Chromium. You should disable it to restore Chromium's performance".

    And it didn't block `addthis.com` in my benchmark, as advertised in many places.
     
  16. siljaline

    siljaline Former Poster

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Posts:
    6,619
  17. FOXP2

    FOXP2 Guest

    Nasty technical details (Oh, the agony!):
    Windows 7 HP SP1 x64
    Privacy Foundation DNS
    Cyberfox Portable 33.0.2 x64
    Adblock Plus 2.65 & subscriptions:
    -EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Fanboy's Annoyance, Youtube: Pure Video Experience
    Ghostery 5.4.1
    Badger 0.2.3

    Disclaimer: I read the EFF Webbuhnetz site where it says, "Badger is primarily a privacy tool, not an ad blocker" and under the question, "How is Privacy Badger different to Disconnect, Adblock Plus, Ghostery, and other blocking extensions?" I read the two paragraphs. (Well, the whole FAQ actually. But I don't want to get ahead of anyone.)

    Even with a heavily subscribed ABP with all trackers and cookies blocked in Ghostery, in this example Badger disallowed broader content from two services. Apparently both aren't snagged fully by Ghostery or at all by ABP no doubt due to reduced intrusion expectations in the former and no corresponding filters in the latter. With ABP disabled, Ghostery blocks 20 services and Badger adds two AOL yellow to the two in this example. With ABP and Ghostery disabled, Badger snags 20 in various states of red/yellow/green with some of the more egregious ads prevented from rendering.

    For sites having dozens-to-100+ trackers, there are correspondingly significant numbers of hits in Badger in various states of red/yellow/green.

    Having about 30-40 hours of experience with this addition to my privacy schema, the jury is still out. But so far it's been competent, stable and hasn't presented any issues in my browsing experience. I'm finding Badger to be an extremely effective addition to the ABP/Ghostery combo I've been running for many years.

    I haven't yet popped the hood on Cyberfox to find how and from where Badger works its mojo* and I don't expect to find anything to dissuade me when I get to it. Not finding anything sneaky in my TCP logs either.

    *update
    \profile\extensions\jid1-UniqueString@jetpack.xpi and
    \profile\jetpack\ jetpack\jid1-UniqueString@jetpack\store.json

    I'm thinking it's a keeper. Cheers.

    Badgered.jpg
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 7, 2014
  18. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @ FOXP2

    On my system I noticed that Ghostery uses more CPU time for blocking stuff, compared to other script-blockers, so I stopped using it. Is Privacy Badger faster?
     
  19. FOXP2

    FOXP2 Guest

    @ Rasheed187

    On my system everything is so incredibly awesome :eek: fast (thereby rendering the concept of "faster" inconsequential), the investigation of metrics involved for the likes of "CPU time" is a waste of time.

    Cheers.
     
  20. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    @ FOXP2

    OK I got it, a couple of months ago when I was using a new Win 8 machine, I felt that it was slowing down browsing. On older machines you can feel it even more. You clearly don't have that problem, but for me combining script-blockers is currently not a good idea.
     
  21. Nanobot

    Nanobot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    Posts:
    238
    Location:
    Neo Tokyo
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mStT_mIi6Y&list=UU0A3ldncnGQ1M_RU2Wb4L2A

    quidsup run a small test with ABE, Ghostery & PB using Wireshark, unfortunately PB didn't fare well, however what i found more interesting is not so the results but a couple of comments he left on Ghostery.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 23, 2014
  22. FOXP2

    FOXP2 Guest

    Yawn.

    It's been a while since I've sniffed Ghostery in the five years I've been using it. So, I thought I'd have a look-see again.

    quidsup's "mysterious" Ghostery traffic (to Cloud Front for me) is for certificate authority for domain validation. Much like the many 443 connects one can log while surfing http sites. Ghostery also will occasionally check for and download a new tracker library at amazonaws. At least for connected systems in the USA. I don't know what Her Majesty's subjects must deal with.

    His strategy in comparing his block list and Ghostery simultaneously is inconclusive except that depending on the site, one will catch stuff the other misses and vice versa. So what? In my experience with AB+ (EasyList & EasyPrivacy) and Ghostery in Firefox in Win7x64, on a particular site the latter will snag a dozen or so trackers. Disable AB+, referesh, and Ghosery will snag a dozen or two more. In my environment then, AB+ seems to work ahead of Ghostery. That's what he was presenting in that video and nothing much more IMHO.

    All that said and done, the combo of AB+, Ghostery and PB delevers the most care-free (no more hosts files!!), quiet and unobtrusive intuhwebz experience in the two-plus decades since those accursed ads showed up.

    Ghostery doesn't flag Evidon? Shocking! It doesn't need flagging at all, actually, otherwise it would be in EasyPrivacy's subscription. Or the Pollock or MVPs hosts files. Or... Never mind. Besides, anyone smart enough to think it should be flagged should be smart enough to flag it him/her self. (CLUE: Evidon changed its name and domain.)

    If anything should be blocked, it'd be 1e100.net :D

    Cheers.
     
  23. caspian

    caspian Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Posts:
    2,301
    Location:
    Oz
    If it learns as it goes then people who use Sandboxie are out of luck.
     
  24. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,029
    Yes, that's a trade-off. But there are other ways to avoid tracking.
     
  25. Rasheed187

    Rasheed187 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2004
    Posts:
    8,026
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Thanks for posting. I do think it's weird that Ghostery seems to phone home, I should have known better, glad that I stopped using it. I also noticed that it can slow down browsing a bit, other script-blockers work way faster.
     
Loading...