Mozilla Testing an Opt-Out System For Firefox Telemetry Collection (bleepingcomputer.com) 227
An anonymous reader writes: "Mozilla engineers are discussing plans to change the way Firefox collects usage data (telemetry), and the organization is currently preparing to test an opt-out clause so they could collect more data relevant to the browser's usage," reports Bleeping Computer. "In a Google Groups discussion that's been taking place since Monday, Mozilla engineers cite the lack of usable data the Foundation is currently receiving via its data collection program. The problem is that Firefox collects data from a very small fraction of its userbase, and this data may not be representative of the browser's real usage." Mozilla would like to fix this by flipping everyone's telemetry setting to enabled and adding an opt-out clause. Engineers also plan to embed Google's RAPPAR project [1, 2] for anonymous data collection.
User data to valuable to opt out (Score:2)
Firefox, faced with a shrinking user base after the extension extinction event that is Firefox 57 will monetize it's remaining users. Mozilla knows there are no good alternatives, Opera, Chrome, Microsoft, Apple, Vivaldi, Pale Moon all track users data in some way so they can get user data for money.
Re:User data to valuable to opt out (Score:5)
Ever tried to opt out of anything using Chrome?
Re: (Score:2)
Did you even read the summary????
The problem Mozilla has is everyone has the telemetry turned off. They're going to turn it back on (without asking), and then give you the option to turn it off again (which shouldn't be necessary if it was already off).
Re:User data to valuable to opt out (Score:4)
even if it takes a bit of work
Key point here. On Mozilla's side, they say they will let you opt out easily.
Still, there are a number of alternatives (Waterfox [waterfoxproject.org] that is FF based with telemetry stripped from the source and Palemoon [slashdot.org]) that do not collect data at all.
Re: (Score:2)
The users were already opted out. Mozilla will involuntarily opt them in, then give them the option to opt out.
Re: (Score:2)
Key point here. On Mozilla's side, they say they will let you opt out easily.
For now. Once Mozilla gets a taste of the data collection, they will likely make it mandatory. They'll probably use the excuse, "too many people opted out." They will completely miss the point of why so many opted out.
Re: (Score:2)
Seamonkey is probably a good alternative for many people. Personally, though, I don't want an "application suite". I just want a browser.
Re: (Score:2)
That's what provoked the creation of Firefox (originally conceived as Netscape lite), but they blew it. The application suite runs just as fast as any "pure" browser out there, and it hardly occupies any more space. And with almost 20 years of user interface stability, there's just nothing better. It's not an "alternative", it's the primary, not to be judged by its market share (or lack thereof).
Re: (Score:3)
If 57 turns out to be as bad as it appears, Seamonkey will be one of the things I evaluate in my search for a new browser.
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I tried SeaMonkey I could neither build nor install it. (They didn't have a pre-built 64-bit version.)
Re: (Score:2)
What measurable advantage would the 64-bit version have over the 32-bit version? Do you regularly view HTML documents whose combined state exceeds multiple GB? Or does your file system lack room for 32-bit libraries?
In Other Words... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not enough people were choosing to compromise their privacy, so we're going to do it for them.
Re:In Other Words... (Score:4, Insightful)
Soon Mozilla will not have anything to differentiate them from everybody else.
I guess you can tell a company's true character by their actions when hard times come.
Firefox's privacy policy scares the heck out of me (Score:5, Informative)
Anybody who claims that Firefox protects their privacy probably hasn't actually looked at Firefox's privacy policy [mozilla.org].
Below are some excerpts from the Firefox privacy policy that is dated July 31, 2017.
Be sure to notice the type of information being collected and possibly even transmitted to third parties (including Google, some "Leanplum" company, a "mobile analytics vendor", and "certain developers"). We see terms like:
Here are the excerpts:
Re: (Score:2)
Mozilla collects too much data. This is the number three complaint right behind:
Why are there so many bugs in Firefox?
Why does Mozilla not listen to me?
Trust comes on foot but leaves on horseback (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not really. They is a good rational for doing this, they are discussing it publicly and the opt-opt will be clear and easy. This is how you develop trust.
Re:Trust comes on foot but leaves on horseback (Score:4)
...They is a good rational for doing this...
No, there isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
On the one hand Mozilla get criticised for not listening to users and delivering changes they don't want.
On the other, when Mozilla tries to listen to users they are told there is no good reason for them to do so.
Okay, it would be better if it was opt-in with a prompt on first run, but opt-out with a clear request before any information is logged isn't terrible.
Re: (Score:2)
...Mozilla tries to listen to users...
Data collection is not 'listening to users." It is data collection.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They tried what you suggested, looking at small numbers of users in detail. This is to get an overview and look for larger trends, like how many people install add-ons that bring back the old UI or enable hidden preferences in about:config.
I wouldn't turn it on myself, but especially if it was opt-in it would be a legitimate way of collecting data.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The appropriate place for Mozilla to Listen to their users is on their bug tracker (as opposed to closing things with the good old WONTFIX or NOTABUG). Or the 'submit feedback' option in the help menu. Listening to users can easily be done without resorting to data mining. If you're that desperate for feedback, open up a "we need feedback" tab every now and then when people upgrade. You could even use the existing feedback infrastructure for that, it should take less than 10 lines of code to implement. If y
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You develop trust by not spying on your users.
I still use Firefox because NoScript, but I can't see myself still using it a year from now, the way things are going.
Re: (Score:2)
This is how you develop trust.
Not really. How you develop trust is to make it opt-in.
However, their transparency about this -- and the fact that they are providing a mechanism to opt out -- makes this less awful than it would otherwise be. It may not be trust-destroying (depending on how obvious they make the data collection and how easy they make the opt-out), but it's certainly not trust-enhancing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not really. They is a good rational for doing this, they are discussing it publicly and the opt-opt will be clear and easy. This is how you develop trust.
Not to mention, forks from Mozilla will reap all the benefits of the improvements that better data yield.
Re: (Score:2)
"No means no." The would-be rapist sheathes his sword.
Static or not? (Score:3)
Firefox is used to visit WEBPAGES.
This is likely to run into a definition dispute, sometimes called "no true Scotsman", "misunderstood word", or "Layne's Law". To avoid this, we need to clarify something first:
"WEBPAGES" means "HTML documents", which are parsed into a DOM that is styled with CSS and edited in response to user actions with JavaScript. Is this what you meant? Or do you specifically refer to static HTML documents, whose only forms of user interaction are navigation, form submission, and checkbox-hack hiding and showing?
Re: (Score:2)
Any of what? Whether or not the user assumes that "WEBPAGES" include script?
Re: (Score:3)
Pale Moon has its extinction event earlier. Already killed jetpack add-ons, for no reason other than "well other people should just remake their add-ons for us".
It went from solid alternative to firefox to firefox-lite with serious problems due to ridiculous engine change with all the same "developers full of themselves telling everyone else to change to fit their idea on how browser should work"-problem.
Re: (Score:2)
How is that different than any other browser?
Re: (Score:2)
Reading the statement in context will help you comprehend it.
Re: (Score:2)
Is this the same Pale Moon that took the whole of my RAM up last time I tried it?
Re: (Score:2)
For me, I still use SeaMonkey [seamonkey-project.org]. ;)
If they made it opt in (Score:2)
Re: If they made it opt in (Score:2, Insightful)
Huh? Telemetry is currently opt-in, not opt-out, except for beta builds. Your post doesn't make sense, because that is how Firefox is currently configured.
I don't have a problem with betas collecting telemetry on an opt-out basis. I think it's more reasonable to expect that a developer would want to collect more data from versions that are likely to include new features and are explicitly built for testing purposes.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Huh? Telemetry is currently opt-in, not opt-out, except for beta builds. Your post doesn't make sense, because that is how Firefox is currently configured.
Because, this is Slashdot, so whatever Mozilla (and many other companies) do is automatically wrong, even when they do the thing we bitched about them not doing previously
Hey now wait a minute.. (Score:2)
Are you sure this is a geek site?
Re: (Score:2)
Its sad that one setting is already making enough cry that they are talking about other browsers.
It's not this one setting -- this is more like another piece of straw being loaded on the camel's back. If this were the only unpleasant thing Mozilla was doing with Firefox, there wouldn't be such an outcry.
How did companies survive before extensive spying? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It is amazing that we have developed as a civilization in the days before all this privacy-busting data collection.
But how have we developed? When was the last thing you heard anything positive about new software? The number one complaint is that the vendors don't seem to know how users actually use the software and thus make stupid changes. This goes back a good 10+ years now.
Now they introduce telemetry to actually find out how users use software and the users lose their shit.
How did we develop? Poorly!
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed. I always cringe when telemetry is represented as "critical" in some way.
Even setting aside the politics of privacy, it's far from clear to me that telemetry has been, on the whole, all that much of a benefit in terms of software quality. Generally speaking, software quality has been declining for years, and I often see objectively bad decisions being made on the basis of telemetry.
Good use for telemetry: getting a better understanding of how your software is malfunctioning. Bad use for telemetry: us
Re: (Score:2)
It is always my suspicion that telemetry is being used as an excuse to justify decisions made for other reasons...though sometimes I'm at a loss to guess *what* those other reasons were. Often it just seems to be "I'm bored with the current layout, so let's change something.".
Re: (Score:2)
Because that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rs [youtube.com]was before all the kewl millennials decided to use Agile/Scrum as the only way to develop code. No QA as your users are the testers with smily or frowns. Windows 10 has had no QA at all whatsoever as an example.
Oxymoron alert! (Score:5, Funny)
...Engineers also plan to embed Google's RAPPAR project [1, 2] for anonymous data collection....
Using the word "google" with the phrase "anonymous data collection" may invoke laughter. And disbelief.
Re: (Score:2)
Google does *lots* of things. They don't *all* spy on you.
OTOH, I didn't search out what the RAPPAR project is or does. It's quite possible that's one of the many that *do* spy on you.
Odd PR move in the wake of what's coming (Score:5, Interesting)
My first response: They're about to kill its best, remaining feature in the minds of many, and now they say, "Let me spy on you."
But I ultimately get what they're trying to do. After all this online complaining, they may finally be having to accept that they really need to know more about how people use their product. Considering how many people here have complained about how the Mozilla devs "don't know what we really want!! Why are they doing X??", this should be something they should consider doing.
Sounds like they're damned if they do, damned if they don't. Maybe us complainers should look in the mirror and realize we may be one of the toughest crowd of browser users in the world to please. "No, you can't collect my data!.... Wait - Why are you removing X? I USE THAT FEATURE! Don't you know that about your users?
Maybe that's why Google Chrome has outstripped Firefox over the last several years when it comes to user base size. They KNOW what most people want, even if we don't like to admit to everything we want?
I'm a loyal Firefox user - and I'll probably still opt-out while I grumble about losing most of my add-ons. But I won't honestly be able to say that Firefox's eventual demise will be on the Mozilla Foundation alone.
Re:Odd PR move in the wake of what's coming (Score:4, Funny)
Firefox now renders porn 1000% faster using 50% less memory and supports up to 999 tabs. Every other feature was removed.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering how many people here have complained about how the Mozilla devs "don't know what we really want!! Why are they doing X??", this should be something they should consider doing.
The remaining Firefox users are pretty vocal and forceful about their desires. Mozilla doesn't need telemetry to find out what people want. They're being told outright every day.
Re: (Score:2)
People complain for years about things they don't like, and the Mozilla foundation says, "Suck it up, dudes." People discuss new features on the forums, and Mozilla heartily ignores said feedback.
Obviously, collecting data by force for investigative purposes will fix this problem, because they have no idea what the problem is!
The more companies whine about telemetry, the more convinced I am telemetry is just for making BS reports to shove into managers' and investors' faces. Numbers are useless if you don
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Firefox started losing market share the moment they switched to the 'release every five minutes and don't allow users to stick to old versions' model.
Then, when people pointed out that it was a disaster for business users, that developer said 'actually, dude, we really don't care about the business market'. That was pretty much the point that all the businesses I'm involved with stopped using Firefox and switched to Chrome. That then led to employees switching to Chrome at home.
Then they had the SJW debacle
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox started losing market share the moment they switched to the 'release every five minutes and don't allow users to stick to old versions' model.
This. Rapid-release has been a pretty terrible thing across the board, not just with Firefox.
Firefox engineers obviously aren't happy... (Score:3, Interesting)
The constant update cycle, trying to become Chrome-but-worse, disabling treasured extensions and plugins, all of these tactics and more have cratered Firefox's market share, but some people still apparently have it installed on their system.
Clearly, these few remaining miscreants must be driven away as fast as possible. Default collection of private data should do the trick!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I still use it because -- as flawed as it is -- I haven't found anything that meets my needs better. 57 looks to be changing that equation, though. We'll see.
Re: (Score:2)
I moved to Pale Moon because it's pre-disaster FIrefox. However, my needs might not be similar to yours. It doesn't have as add-ons as Firefox...though that might be changing.
Re: (Score:2)
I've tried out Pale Moon, and it is a viable place to run to.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on Firefox must usage AGILE!
Re: (Score:2)
Come on Firefox must use Agile! [youtube.com]
How has MozColonSlashSlashA used this data before? (Score:2)
What telemetry would be acceptable? (Score:4, Interesting)
The knee-jerk reaction is that all telemetry is a privacy nightmare.
As a thought experiment, what kind of telemetry might be acceptable?
For example, suppose it were 2 integers collected weekly:
* number of HTTPS sites visited
* number of HTTP sites visited
Unavoidably, there would be metadata: IP address and date/time of data collection. So as well as the intended analytics ("what proportion of the sites users are visiting are HTTPS sites?") it would be possible to build a per-IP profile of number of sites visited over time.
Is this level of telemetry unacceptable?
If it is acceptable, then we've established that it is not telemetry per se that is bad but rather the data being collected.
Ongoing telemetry would require trust ("when I consented you were collecting two integers, but now you're collecting all sorts of other things") unless totally transparent, but perhaps even with total transparency the burden of verification that then falls on the user is too onerous.
I wonder if there could be a role for someone like the EFF to be the guardian of telemetry info, i.e. Firefox sends telemetry data to the EFF and they then decide whether it's ok or not, or anonymize it (e.g. strip out IP addresses in the above example), before sending it on to Mozilla. Of course, they'd want to be paid for this service, and since users reject the notion of paying for a browser the obvious payer would be Mozilla, but that creates moral hazard. Given that it'd be a public good, the government could run and/or fund it, but I suspect there's a large overlap between the set of people who have a problem with telemetry and the set of people who distrust their government.
Re: (Score:3)
what kind of telemetry might be acceptable?
That entirely depends on who is collecting the data. With some organizations, such as Microsoft or random developers that I've never heard of, there is no amount of telemetry that is acceptable to me at all.
With others (I used to count Mozilla among these, but I'm not so sure anymore), I have enough trust in them that I'm OK with quite a lot of telemetry.
There are also things that are never OK no matter who you are: lists of files on my system, what applications I have installed or run, the contents of any
Et Tu, Mozilla? (Score:2)
They really are lowering their standards.
When you've already shot BOTH feet, (Score:2)
The next logical step is to set your sights higher up your own leg. And Mozilla is being oh-so-logical, although I fail to understand the peculiar logic that's driving them to squander the paltry remainder of their user base.
Increasingly spaced out nagging? (Score:2)
One alternative to flipping everyone to enabled and having a tickbox you've got to discover to opt out is perhaps some sort of increasingly spaced out nagging? I'm thinking that everyone who isn't sending telemetry gets a nag dialogue that they can delay the re-appearance of in increasing intervals (e.g. for one month after first nag, 3 more months after second nag, 1 year after third nag and finally never nag me again after that).
If they get a load of take-up after nag 1 in the first month, they can use a
Re: (Score:2)
I'll tolerate a single nag, but it better have a "never show this again" button and honor it. I've uninstalled more than one program over this issue.
Implementation (Score:3)
If, on the other hand, they do something nasty, like remove the checkboxes entirely, and make you jump through a bunch of hoops to 'opt out', and then you have no way of independently verifying your 'opt out' choice has been taken seriously, then I say "screw you, you bastards, you have become everything you hate".
Opt-out for is illegal in the EU (Score:2)
At least for anything even remotely identifying people. IP addresses, for example, fall under this. It always has to be opt-in.
Mozilla has a fundamental problem... (Score:5, Interesting)
.
Privacy-busting data collection is not going to fix that problem, as the data will more than likely be interpreted by the developers to confirm their misdirected vision.
Instead of data collection (something that is done because it is easy, not necessarily the proper solution), the Firefox developers need to take a step back and look at their vision for Firefox. That is the conversation that needs to take place with the Firefox users.
Offhand, I'd say that priority #1 is that the Firefox users don't want Firefox to continue on the goal of turning into a Chrome clone. With the addition of data collection, that goal is almost met.
I could go on, but I doubt if anyone is reading, they're probably drooling over all the data they will be collecting soon.
Mozilla screwed up, thus Firefox was born (Score:2)
Do you remember why Firefox was created, and why it took off? I certainly do, I remember using IIRC .6 of it, and it got smaller with each release. Why was that? because it was removing the Mozilla/Netscape crap. It also worked to put users in control of not just the browser experiance, but the browser.
Well what do you think happened when Mozilla/Netscape died and they took over Firefox as their flagship product? Sure they are ignoring their users and chase telemtry now admiting that the data could be wr
Here's what I read... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Fork, here we come (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Impossible. We need user tracking, built in shockwave support, 230 js vulnerabilities per 8000 lines of code, and a 1GB memory overhead to make it work. Also, PNG is not supported.
HTML, CSS, bookmarks, and no JS? (Score:3)
I'm assuming that your preference to omit "Everything else" implies omitting JavaScript. If so, then what do you prefer to replace JavaScript?
Re: (Score:2)
If so, then what do you prefer to replace JavaScript?
Personally, I'd love for there to be no replacement for JavaScript at all. That's why I love NoScript so much: it lets me disable it everywhere, but still lets me selectively enable scripts for the few sites that both require it to function and that are critical to me.
But I understand that I'm in the minority on this issue.
Re: (Score:2)
What should application developers do to accommodate people like you, who are very reluctant to enable script-in-the-browser but may be using a minority native platform?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure how to answer that, so I'll just say how I address the issue as a developer myself: I don't try to accommodate everybody.
In my own business, I recognize that it's impossible for me to target a wide variety of platforms while maintaining acceptable product quality. I don't have a programming team, so I can realistically handle two -- maybe three -- platforms, and leave it at that. In my experience, it's better to have people know that if my name is on it, it's probably top-notch, if limite
Re: (Score:2)
If you "replace Javascript" with something, then I will disable whatever that thing is, too.
JavaScript in a modern web browser is the language of an application platform. Anything that "replaces JavaScript" would have to offer a comparable application platform. If you disable whatever "replaces JavaScript", this means you're disabling application platforms.
So if you've disabled all means to add applications to your computer, then what do you do with your computer other than view static HTML documents? Or what exceptions do you make to your general policy of disabling all means to add applications
Re: (Score:2)
So if you've disabled all means to add applications to your computer
I don't follow. The browser may have transmuted into an "application platform", but there is also another "application platform" on any given machine: the operating system.
Disabling scripting in the browser in no way disables all means of adding applications to your machine. It only disables one.
Re: (Score:2)
Essentially he's asking this [slashdot.org].
Do you believe that any website more complicated than a static HTML file should be a separate application that hopefully is availble for your Operating System? If not, what do you propose should be done to get that same level of functionality?
Re: (Score:2)
Teeples said if you don't allow your web browser to be an applications platform, then you have no applications platform
My response is that's not true: you have an operating system, which is the ultimate applications platform. I wasn't making a broader comment than that.
But since you asked: I avoid web-based applications not because they're web-based applications, but because they tend to be inferior and irritating when compared to native applications. This is even true of GMail, which people often point to
Re: (Score:2)
Everything else is unnecessary and simply bloatware.
Yes precisely as evidenced by ... a very active extension ecosystem. Wait what?
Sorry but the list for a decent browser is far longer than that. We argue about fine details here all the time. Your list barely scratches the surface.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know how to make the perfect browser. But the browser I want is one that I am in control of my PC. Not some website, not the adds, not the virus or other badware.
Firefox without addons does better than others(with things hidden in about:config). And with 2-5 choice addons it's the best in having users in control. I don't give my parents and friends things like ublock/umatrix/noscript, but insted give them Disconnect(or ublock using limited lists).
People don't need to know hot to make what they wan
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I know, it's with the best of intentions.
Then you must know something I don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Telemetry, he said, has shown that it confuses (some?) users, that's why it was removed.
If "confuses (some?) users" is even approximately the litmus test, then say goodbye to every single feature and dont stop there. You can say goodbye to things like the "back" button too.
Re: (Score:2)
submit feedback linking to Slashdot articles so that our comments are hopefully read.
No need. I guarantee there are quite a lot of Mozillians who regularly read /.
Re: (Score:2)
Telemetry helps improve usability - if interpreted correctly.
This is the key. The problem is that it is extremely difficult to interpret telemetry data correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
If *that's* the case, they care clearly ignoring it. FWIW, I *don't* have telemetry turned off, but recent builds of FireFox have gotten so much worse that even with the cost of rebuilding my bookmarks I'm starting to consider switching browsers. (For me that's a considerable cost, too. I've probably got over 1000 bookmarked sites that I occasionally visit, carefully organized into folders by topic.) And I've found the bookmarks sidebar to be one of the most useful features.
Anybody have a decent suggest
Re: (Score:2)
Can't you just export and import your bookmarks to the new browser?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm considering that, but it's a clearly worse option than the bookmarks sidebar. Konqueor has a bookmarks sidebar, but it doesn't seem to handle folders within the bookmarks sidebar. Minimalist GUIs are basically unusable for my use case. SeaMonkey worked fine as of 2000, but I think I may now be having more tabs open most of the time than it could then handle, and the current default version doesn't run on a 64-bit system. (I've downloaded a custom build, and may switch to that, but I haven't tested
Re: (Score:3)
When settings like telemetry are on a preferences page, average users won't navigate to the page.
Yeah, I've noticed this myself. It baffles me a bit, because when I use a program for the firs time, the very first thing I do is examine everything on the options pages.
But then, the first thing I do when I get a new appliance or device is read the instructions (often before completely unpacking it), so I'm admittedly a freak.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lack of sufficient alternatives.