Shots fired 🔥

  • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
    13914·
    2 年前

    those tables usually are wrong or misleading, i don’t like them.

    Edge for example has the 3rd party cookie blocking and it works ok, so why it’s “no” and not “somewhat” or similar?

      • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
        302·
        2 年前

        should be “prevent sites from tracking”. Or they carefully chose that sentence in order to give a “no” to edge and “somewhat” to chrome and opera

        • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          231·
          2 年前

          Firefox uses a built-in domain blocklist for tracking protection, in addition to blocking third party cookies

          Although that would not explain why Chrome and Opera pass that at all to begin with IMO. Maybe these browsers enforce their own additional data silos or other deviations from specs when in Private Browsing mode. I know Chrome for example shrinks the storage provision for various JS APIs down to practically nothing when in Incognito mode, which can break things like Teams Web etc when you start sharing files.

          Either way though all marketing ever is, is just a selection of carefully chosen words. In this case, browsers too, as there’s no Brave there (I’m not a fan of Brave anyway, but worth noting)

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          3·
          2 年前

          It’s this.

          Firefox’ total cookie protection does not block third party cookies, it isolates them in separate jars for each website…

          Total Cookie Protection works by creating a separate “cookie jar” for each website you visit. Instead of allowing trackers to link up your behavior on multiple sites, they just get to see behavior on individual sites. Any time a website, or third-party content embedded in a website, deposits a cookie in your browser, that cookie is confined to the cookie jar assigned to only that website. No other websites can reach into the cookie jars that don’t belong to them and find out what the other websites’ cookies know about you — giving you freedom from invasive ads and reducing the amount of information companies gather about you.

    • Cheradenine@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      16·
      2 年前

      The ‘Enforce users choice’ is just GPC on by default I believe. Which means nothing since it is still voluntary.

    • fossphi@lemm.eeEnglish
      52·
      2 年前

      Does it, though? Or does Microsoft come under the second party label

        • ares35@kbin.social
          6·
          2 年前

          the ‘msn news’ that most people see is the ‘start’ page that’s baked into the edge browser. ubo does not work on it. for users that actually want that page, i clean up the start page settings and throw a bookmark to msn.com on their toolbar instead so ubo works.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      22·
      2 年前

      We Dutchies had a commercial like that.

      Loosely translated: “We from WC duck recommend WC duck products.”

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zipEnglish
      9·
      2 年前

      Its kind of like Simplex Chat claiming to be more secure and private than everything else. (Solid platform though)

    • JonEFive@midwest.social
      21·
      2 年前

      i’m the bestest browser guys, i swear. source: trust me bro.

      Microsoft Edge has entered the chat

  • Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social
    9022·
    2 年前

    I think this is a shitpost of the highest order. If this appears to everyone (?) it adds nothing, and the crappy table is just astonishingly blatant cherry-picking.

  • Walop@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    642·
    2 年前

    I like using Firefox, but it’s a bit ironic to have google analytics tracking on the page you declare to protect the users privacy.

  • 1984@lemmy.today
    29·
    2 年前

    I didn’t get that but I guess because I have a plugin to give me nice backgrounds on new tabs.

    But yeah, shots fired. Nice!

    The only issue is that only already existing Firefox users see this, and we already know this.

  • Jarix@lemmy.world
    21·
    2 年前

    Im just over here using firefox since it was still netscape navigator 2.0.

    Another update? Okay

  • sarmale@lemmy.zip
    232·
    2 年前

    Every brother has one of these on their site, and somehow that browser always wins

  • DannyMac@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3317·
    2 年前

    They need to add a row for “Owned by a foreign superpower”“Owned by the Chinese government” and a check for Opera.

    • kadotux@lemmings.world
      31·
      2 年前

      There’s a line “Insecure website warning” and it says firefox doesn’t have it. My firefox always displays a warning when opening a http site. edit: Isn’t https-only enabled by default?

      • Political Custard@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
        3·
        2 年前

        Sorry, I don’t use Firefox so I cannot check what the default is at the moment. I have Librefox and Mullvad Broswer and https is on by default and they both have a green tick on this test.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
        2·
        2 年前

        Off the top of my head https-only is an available setting but is not enabled by default. Although “insecure website warning” would suggest to me that the certificate is expired or invalid, and Firefox is usually the easiest web browser to push past a self-signed certificate warning for local services

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
        3·
        2 年前

        The browser window size is an easy way to fingerprint. You might be the only person viewing web content in a 1916x988 window who also has a certain font installed.

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
            2·
            2 年前

            So, I haven’t done any html or css since around when the mobile web was in its infancy but by my understanding responsive websites don’t need to know the exact screen resolution to be responsive. You anchor elements to certain parts of other elements and some are anchored to certain regions of the screen and change the arrangement if there’s not enough space to fit them all on that axis

            • Aatube@kbin.social
              1·
              2 年前

              For layouts that change quite a bit, that sounds like quite a hassle compared to if screen small arrange like dis.

      • Political Custard@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
        3·
        2 年前

        It’s in the “Fingerprinting resistance tests” section so it would be one of the ways of preventing a browser from being uniquely identified by various reported variables, screen height, width etc. It’s worth taking a look at this site that someone else here mentioned to see what information your browser is giving up about itself: https://www.amiunique.org/

        • Aatube@kbin.social
          1·
          2 年前

          Sure, you can get fingerprinted if you have a unique window size, but do you really want to disable that at the cost of disabling all responsive websites?

          • Political Custard@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
            1·
            2 年前

            I am using Librewolf and Mullvad Browser as daily drivers, both of which pass the fingerprinting resistance tests, and the only problem I have experienced was with Twitch and that was solved by changing the user agent.

            • Aatube@kbin.social
              1·
              2 年前

              That’s not what I mean by responsive. Look at the first image in the article, and now resize the window. By disabling media queries, that probably doesn’t happen anymore.

              • Political Custard@lemmygrad.mldeleted by creator
                1·
                2 年前

                That image is responsive on both my browsers. I used the Twitch example only to make the point that that was the only problem I’d experienced, not that it was necessarily related to responsiveness.

                • Aatube@kbin.social
                  1·
                  2 年前

                  Saying that “that image is responsive” confuses me. Do you mean the resized website behaves like the image?

    • Druid@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      2 年前

      So it says that the fingerprint is unique. What information do I gain from that?

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        3·
        2 年前

        It means that you are not protected. The fingerprint resistance failed. Firefox has very weak fingerprint resistance out of the box, I don’t know why they advertise it as being effective. If your fingerprint is unique, it means every site you visit knows exactly who you are and share your visit and actions on that site with all their friends so that you can be tracked through the internet.
        To be clear, a unique fingerprint doesn’t have to mean you can be tracked. You can set up your browser to randomise attributes, which means you can have a unique fingerprint, but not an unusual fingerprint, and not the same fingerprint on any two visits. That way you can’t be singled out from the other users who set up their browsers like this, and if done well, can’t be singled out from any first-time visitor.

        • Druid@lemmy.zipEnglish
          1·
          2 年前

          Is there anything I can do to mask the fingerprint to a degree or am I fucked?

          • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
            2·
            2 年前

            You do have resources to limit fingerprinting, including beating many techniques, but it’s involved and I don’t have any useful links for you right now. On the site I linked, they provide resources to help you – including showing you exactly how they fingerprinted you. The easiest-strongest change is disabling javascript (The noscript addon makes this toggle-able and configurable), but of course that breaks all websites.

      • considine@lemmy.ml
        3·
        2 年前

        The information that Google iframe gains on almost every site is that it is you visiting that site, as verified by your unique fingerprint. Into your profile it goes.

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          3·
          2 年前

          Yeah it actually really bad that they can identify every single unique user like this.

  • Vrtrx@lemmy.world
    148·
    2 年前

    Honestly I don’t see the reason they put that there. I already own Firefox why are you trying to win me over?

    • sab@kbin.social
      29·
      2 年前

      People tend to have multiple browsers. You might have FireFox installed but still not be aware why you should use it over other browsers on your computer.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
        4·
        2 年前

        This is a very good reason to put this kind of page in. For less computer savvy people, they may vaguely know “if I click this fox icon it takes me to the Internet and so does this colorful circle and this blue swoosh, so it’s all the same” but when they accidentally open one they use less often, seeing something like this might push their preference a little for which one they open

      • Vrtrx@lemmy.world
        1·
        2 年前

        Oh that makes sense. I just assumed people who have Firefox would know stuff like that since Chrome is usually the one people know about but yeah it could have already been in the OC or they just searched for a different one randomly.

      • ares35@kbin.social
        1·
        2 年前

        i do the multiple browsers thing, but it’s firefox, firefox developer, and librewolf (i also have a seamonkey and a waterfox on one system). and they can all run at the same time without conflicting with another.

        the few instances where i need a chromium-based one, it’s a fresh ‘install’ of a portable ‘alternative’ like vivaldi or opera from portableapps (or via appimage on linux) and then deleted when i’m done with it.

    • mostlikelyaperson@lemmy.world
      1456·
      2 年前

      And Brave too, which inconveniently beats firefox hands down in independent privacy checks. The mozilla foundation finally needs to step it up.

      • RmDebArc_5@lemmy.mlEnglish
        421·
        2 年前

        That heavily depends. Brave may have better advice/tracker blocking by default, but they send more telemetry. Them being an advertising company also doesn’t speak for them. Brave is a decent browser and on IOS/IPadOS a good option for open source + Adblock, but max privacy would be reconfigured Firefox or Librewolf.

          • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            151·
            2 年前

            Even if it weren’t for the crypto, Brave’s CEO is one sleazy, untrustworthy motherfucker. I’d never put my privacy in his hands. Just an absolute dogshit reputation.

            • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
              55·
              2 年前

              I figured there was enough to criticize without needing to resort to ad-hominem attacks against the CEO. However, if we’re going there, then I’d be remiss not to point out that he’s also the motherfucker who inflicted Javascript upon the world when we could’ve had a decent language like Python or Scheme in the browser instead. Not to downplay the significance of his bigotry, but that’s almost the greatest sin of them all!

              • Mario_Dies.wav@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                35·
                2 年前

                Homophobes always come bundled with a lot of other problems. There’s no way anyone can trust a homophobe of any kind.

                Anyway, blocking you. Have a great life, asshole.

                Edit: Bonus fuck javascript

                Edit 2: This was so wrong of me, I’m sorry. I’m an ass. Leaving my comment for honesty’s sake.

          • Trainguyrom@reddthat.comEnglish
            8·
            2 年前

            It’s also yet another Chromium fork which if there’s one thing the world does not need more of, it’s Chromium forks

          • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
            312·
            2 年前

            Fact: your opinion is based on snippets of things you heard online and doesn’t actually match reality 🤷

            • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
              132·
              2 年前

              Fact: your opinion is based on snippets of things you heard online and doesn’t actually match reality 🤷

              My facts come directly from Brave’s own claims, so fuck off with your condescension, fanboi. Your dismissive trolling isn’t welcome here.

              • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world
                14·
                2 年前

                Find me a claim from Brave’s that it’s a protection racket.

                Find me a claim from Brave’s that it’s a crypto scam. NOT just that they use crypto, but that it’s a scam.

                And before you start, a blanket statement of “all crypto is a scam” is not a fact. It’s hyperbole and your opinion.

                So do you actually have “facts”? Or did you just present opinions as facts?

                • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  2 年前

                  Of course criminals aren’t going to admit that they’re criminals. But when they describe their behavior (in this case, man-in-the-middle replacing sites’ ads with their own and then extorting them to participate in the crypto scheme in order to replace the revenue) anybody objective would recognize that it is, in fact, criminal.

            • Rooki@lemmy.world
              41·
              2 年前

              Sadly its not just “heard”. Just google it, you will find enough “incidents” brave had.

  • Foçalors@lemm.eeEnglish
    1·
    2 年前

    If only Firefox on Android doesn’t refresh the pages every time I switch to another app and back to Firefox (and even showing only black screen), just to input 2FA code or card detail. It becomes really annoying.

    The desktop browser is pretty fine though.