Conversation

This basically amounts to "Firefox users become Chrome users" since the motivation (anger) is high and the barrier (setting up everything all over again) is same...

Quote Tweet

Bryan Steele

@canadianbryan

May 4, 2019

Crazy, it's looking more like users will need both a Firefox update and re-install all extensions/addons. Yikes.

Show this thread

Replying to

Also, users like me who are in the Google ecosystem and were slowly gathering energy to move off Chrome and switch to Firefox, well, the grass isn't that much greener over there, is it? Back to inertia and apathy.

Replying to

and

I'm sure that other Chromium-based browsers like Brave are picking up a lot of users too. I personally stopped using Firefox on Android because they showed no sign of ever implementing a sandbox in the near future, let alone one with site isolation to stop Spectre leaks, etc.

Replying to

and

I haven't used it on the desktop since a decade ago, but I used it on Android for uBlock Origin. I'd rather just use a Chromium-based browser with comparable filtering built into it, but uBlock Origin is still significantly better than the built-in filtering engine options.

Replying to

and

Could you please give more details : why unblock origin is so much better than filtering lists? (AFAIR, it uses EasyList and EasyPrivacy)

Replying to

and

It's a particularly good implementation able to block more of the connections based on which content isn't needed, along with having some extensions to the filter syntax. It uses more than EasyList and EasyPrivacy. Other implementations aren't able to block as much of it.

Replying to

It's a best effort stopgap measure as a form of attack surface reduction and uBlock Origin does it best. I don't believe in blacklisting as a way to fundamentally improve privacy since it's very incomplete, easily bypassed and is pushing advertising / tracking to being 1st party.

Replying to

and

UBO lets you block all third-party scripts, with an exception list. Requires a bit more work but doesn't suffer from the problem of a deny list approach.

Replying to

and

The issue is that an increasing amount of the tracking is done via code served by the first party. If you take a look at sites like Twitter, Reddit, nytimes.com, etc. they are doing extensive analytics / tracking via first party code, often code made by third parties.

Replying to

Blocking third party code in the client is not really blocking third party code or tracking, but rather the subset of it done through direct connections to third party servers. There can still be dynamic connections / code from third parties without the client seeing any of it.

5:54 PM · May 4, 2019Twitter Web Client

Replying to

It's increasingly moving towards first party integration and third party middleware on the server, pulling code from the third party and pushing back the analytics data. It's much lighter, more accurate and inherently harder to block. The adversaries aren't static and unchanging.