Help EFF Test a New Tool To Stop Creepy Online Tracking 219
An anonymous reader writes "EFF is launching a new extension for Firefox and Chrome called Privacy Badger. Privacy Badger automatically detects and blocks spying ads around the Web, and the invisible trackers that feed information to them. You can try it out today."
Re:What's the difference (Score:5, Informative)
This monitors the behavior of web sites, not the function. So if there's a non-advertising site that just puts out tracking bugs, it will get blocked. If there's an advertising site that doesn't send tracking cookies, it won't be blocked. There's no blacklist--it's all based on observed behavior.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:What's the difference (Score:4, Informative)
That's the best policy. The problem isn't sites using JS, it's sites sucking in random bits of JS from 5 otrhert domains that each suck in yet more bits from 3 or 4 additional domains.
Generally whjen I see that, I decide they're trying to convince me to just allow all witrhout seeing everything I'm allowing. That, in turn, tells me that that's is the last thing I should do so I leave the page and never go back.
Re:What's the difference (Score:4, Informative)
And in a related note, both of these fine extension works fine in Pale Moon, but refuse to install in Seamonkey, which is a deciding factor in which one I am going to use in the future. I dont know why it breaks in Seamonkey but if anyone does please chime in. Is it just a matter of a bad compatibility check or is there more to it?
Search engine optimization (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe you just get half a sheet of text, or the first 1.3 windowfuls, then the site will pick up on the tracking bug being broken
If a web server is configured to deliver only the abstract to viewers behind user agents that include tracking countermeasures, then it will deliver only the abstract to search engines. They tend to retrieve pages with no JavaScript, no Referer, and no cookies.
Re:What's the difference (Score:4, Informative)
It's not that websites shouldn't rely on JavaScript to function, it's that they shouldn't rely on *third-party* JavaScripts from jQuery, a thousand fucking ad servers, a plugin from here and there, Google tracking... that's why what should be a basic website takes forever to load: it's having to make requests to 50 different servers to load a single page.
JavaScript-dependent websites *can* be done properly. Most are not.
Re:Does it block Piwik Analytics? (Score:4, Informative)
Piwik [wikipedia.org] is a self-hosted web analytics package. In other words, your visit to an EFF page is being tracked by the EFF.
Re:Ghostery (Score:5, Informative)
From WP: [wikipedia.org]
"Evidon, the company owning Ghostery, plays a dual role in the online advertising industry. Ghostery blocks sites from gathering personal information. But it does have an opt-in feature named GhostRank that can be checked to "support" them. GhostRank takes note of ads encountered and blocked, and sends that information, though anonymously, back to advertisers so they can better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked.[4]"