Mozilla is planning to collect domain-level browsing history on an opt-out basis

Discussion in 'privacy problems' started by mirimir, Aug 22, 2017.

  1. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mozilla.governance/81gMQeMEL0w

    They're not planning to collect URLs, just top-level+1 domains (e.g. images.google.com). And sure, there's no problem with images.google.com because it's generically innocuous. But what about pornhub.com for users in Saudi Arabia? Or some Japanese site that's essentially child porn for users in the US? The top-level+1 domain in many cases is totally incriminating.

    This is a horrible development. If Mozilla starts collecting this sort of data on an opt-out basis, it will put many users at risk. Seriously, WTF?
     
  2. Minimalist

    Minimalist Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2014
    Posts:
    7,565
    Location:
    Slovenia
    Maybe they didn't hear about GDPR coming to effect in Europe next year? All personal data collecting should be allowed by user with opt-in option.
     
  3. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,097
    How do Japanese sites get away with child porn I thought that was internationally illegal already
     
  4. NiteRanger

    NiteRanger Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2016
    Posts:
    428
    Location:
    Far East
    Use Waterfox!

    The developer sure to block this
     
  5. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    839
    Privacy for privacys sake. I don't want google mozilla or anyone else collecting my movements no matter how generically innocuous it is and I don't want to be lumbered with a stupid opt out. Mozilla is on a continual slippery slope.
    I absolutely agree. The thing is with opt out, the onus is on you to know there's an option to start with. Then they make it as annoying as possible so you won't bother and/or bury it to make it as hard as possible to find.
     
  6. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    4,888
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Or you reach a point where you may as well dump Firefox and use Chrome because the reason you started using Firefox in the first place no longer exists.
     
  7. Reality

    Reality Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2013
    Posts:
    839
    Googles Chrome? That would be far worse than FF and that's saying something.
     
  8. zapjb

    zapjb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Posts:
    3,942
    Location:
    USA still the best. But getting worse!
    Whether they tell you or not. It's the same.

    Where is this supposed opt-out option? If not available now please someone post link when/if available.

    It'll be worth a laugh to "opt-out".
     
  9. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,097
    Makes you wonder who really calls the shots at Mozilla.
    The Mozilla Foundation has (or had) a list of principles that were supposed to define their purpose, one of which said,
    IMO they have consistently failed to live up to that standard and worse, ignored it and worse still, acted in opposition to it.
     
  10. deBoetie

    deBoetie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Posts:
    1,376
    Location:
    UK
    The mainframe owns you - abandon the illusion that your smart-dumb client could ever escape.
     
  11. summerheat

    summerheat Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2015
    Posts:
    1,159
    This is a bit exaggerated, IMHO. Yes, I, too, would prefer opt-in. On the other hand the important aspect here is how they are planning to do it (and it is still a plan). They are planning to use Differential Privacy and if that Wikipedia article is not completely wrong this seems to be a sound and accepted concept to protect one's privacy. It surely depends on how they will implement it. But since the source code is openly available it will certainly be deliberately scrutinized by the EFF or whoever.
     
  12. zapjb

    zapjb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Posts:
    3,942
    Location:
    USA still the best. But getting worse!
    This **** is flying so fast through the doors one can't count on the EFF nor anyone.

    Considering Firefox & EFF are just a couple of the many players.

    Privacy at best is a tube of toothpaste with millions of pinholes. Many people like ME don't know how & are too lazy to brush without that paste. But I floss so I know what's there & am not deluded.




    I love creative writing but I can't seem to translate my writings to quippets in long form mostly just postings.
     
  13. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,322
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Lol! I think this has been happening for a while.
     
  14. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,322
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I've noticed this for a while now.
     
  15. inka

    inka Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Posts:
    425
    and if too many folks opt out, updated version of the browser ignores the established prefkey
    ~~ superceding it with a newly-introduced "yadda.something2.enabled" prefkey.

    dance, dance, dance...
     
  16. inka

    inka Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2009
    Posts:
    425
    Waterfox is an interesting alternative, I agree.
    It is a mature project (577,000+ github commits, spanning several years https://github.com/MrAlex94/Waterfox )
    and AFAICT it has been pulling in the "Tor Privacy Uplift" patches, through ff v55
    and states a goal of maintaining support for "legacy addons", unlike TorBrowser which is already
    https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/query?status=!closed&keywords=~ff59-esr
    tracking/planning to rebase on ff59-esr
     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2017
  17. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    Good point. Someone commented that they would file a complaint under GDPR :)
     
  18. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    I don't know. Is there really such a thing as "internationally illegal"? Who would get to say? The UN?
     
  19. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    Yes, that's been a common reaction. So what's the next best option, now?
     
  20. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    I don't think that this is implemented yet. This is the public comment phase. Maybe the wave of criticism will deter them.
     
  21. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    I gather that developers are really hot for this. They argue that they can't optimize Firefox without reliable data about where it doesn't work well.
     
  22. KeyPer4Life

    KeyPer4Life Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2013
    Posts:
    1,027
    Mozilla Testing New Default Opt-Out Setting for Firefox Telemetry Collection.

    Firefox team has decided it will implement a technique called "differential privacy" for
    collecting the extra user data it needs.
    Support for "differential privacy" will be done by embedding Google's RAPPOR project
    (Randomized Aggregatable Privacy-Preserving Ordinal Response) which is currently used for
    collecting anonymous usage data from Google Chrome users.

    Responses to the Google Groups discussions on opt-out setting have been generally negative.

    https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/ne...out-setting-for-firefox-telemetry-collection/
     
  23. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    Sure. That's all fine, in theory. But the idea of collecting all of that data, from users who are too clueless to opt out, is just plain creepy. The history of data depersonalization is not encouraging :(
     
  24. mirimir

    mirimir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Posts:
    6,879
    Cool! I'll check it out. Thanks :)
     
  25. RockLobster

    RockLobster Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2007
    Posts:
    1,097
    That sounds like bs to me. If they want to know how well it works all they need to do is set up test websites and use it but as usual in these kinds of scenarios we will never know who these developers are and what their real agenda is.
    I have been meaning to try to trace through the Mozilla forums and bugzilla who decided it was an "improvement" to remove the browser feature that allowed the user to view the site certificate and fingerprint information. They replaced it with a message that just said this connection is secure.
    That right there is a smoking gun. It is evidence of a deliberate action to weaken security.
    Everyone in the industry knows who Steve Gibson is and everyone in the industry knows about his fingerprint service that breaks MITM attacks. IF you can view the site cert fingerprint in your browser.
    I'm truly sick of this **** and no one wants to say anything. It makes me wonder has everyone had their ****** cut off or are they just putting something in the water nowadays?
     
Loading...