Firefox Plans to Anonymously Collect Browsing Data

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
A post by Mozilla engineer Georg Fritzsche suggests that Firefox may be switching a “differential privacy” mode that would allow developers to collect sensitive data without being able to make conclusions about individual users, thus preserving their privacy. The team appears to be frustrated by the fact that data can currently only be collected if users opt in, which makes it difficult to determine how people use the browser and what improvements should be made. Some say that this is a misstep, being that Firefox used to respect users’ desire for complete privacy.

The Google Open Source project called RAPPOR is the most widely known and deployed implementation of differential privacy. What we plan to do now is run an opt-out SHIELD study [6] to validate our implementation of RAPPOR. This study will collect the value for users’ home page (eTLD+1) for a randomly selected group of our release population. We are hoping to launch this in mid-September. This is not the type of data we have collected as opt-out in the past and is a new approach for Mozilla. As such, we are still experimenting with the project and wanted to reach out for feedback.
 
Last edited:
OK, so they are "frustrated by the fact that data can currently only be collected if users opt in"

With their new policy, will we still be able to at least opt-out? It says that the Shield study will be opt-out, but it sounds like there will be more in-depth browser data collected outside of the study, just via normal browser usage.
 
shameful-google-searches3.png


That is all they need to know.
 
When I heard that FF wants to copy Google I could not believe it til now. I will pretty much tweak the hell out of the browser to block this. If I can't I will find something else.
 
Last edited:
Here is what a browser should do... and all that it needs to do.

1. Render web pages properly that the users go to
2. Block stupid intrusive ads
3. Do the above 2 faster than other browsers with a lower footprint if possible
4. Don't have memory leaks
5. Stop pages that are not in the foreground from doing anything until they are in the foreground. (limit unneeded system resource usage)
6. Be able to bookmark pages

Now if people want to load add-ins or whatever, sure, but a browser company doesn't need to spy on the users under the guise of "we need to do it so we know what to improve". Lies is all that is.
 
cyclone3d said:
Here is what a browser should do... and all that it needs to do.

1. Render web pages properly that the users go to
2. Block stupid intrusive ads
3. Do the above 2 faster than other browsers with a lower footprint if possible
4. Don't have memory leaks
5. Stop pages that are not in the foreground from doing anything until they are in the foreground. (limit unneeded system resource usage)
6. Be able to bookmark pages

Now if people want to load add-ins or whatever, sure, but a browser company doesn't need to spy on the users under the guise of "we need to do it so we know what to improve". Lies is all that is.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more, and that situation seems like it's ripe for a new competitor to take advantage of... in fact, even if a paid browser came out that was as good as Chrome without the spying, I'd pay for it! (reasonable cost though, it IS just a web browser).

The fact that FireFox is throwing away their LAST and ONLY competitive advantage currently is hilariously dumb (they used to be the only one with add-ons and therefore the most features, before that they were faster and more efficient... now they lag in every category except "level of spying"). Of course, Mozilla/FF itself are continuously acting dumb now, so they can pretty much die off at this point, for all I care. As long as competition between at LEAST 3 major browsers carries on...
 
Every major change after the 3.x has been for the worse, so this is just natural progression for them.
 
Just as memory leak in FF gets plugged, why would they create another hole - this time in users' privacy?

Are they committing browseuicide?
 
Differential privacy means that your data cannot be identified - in a mathematically provable way. There is no invasion of privacy. You don't need to switch browsers.
 
How about you just keep things stable and working, Mozilla. Firefox is the best internet browser, there's no need to fuck it up going down rabbit holes trying to figure out what new 'features' idiot users want. It's a web browser.

Look at what happened to the Windows UI when Microsoft started that shit (gee, I guess nobody wants a start menu!). Users are mostly stupid and don't know what they need or want.
 
FF has been more problematic with every release. The latest release has a weird issue where randomly my typing slows or pauses for a few seconds. Doesn't happen often but overall the performance of FF seems to be pretty bad compared to the good old days.
 
AVT said:
If there is a unique identifier or a practically unique browser fingerprint can be formed, they just need to connect it once to a non-anonymous identifier once from external info.
Click to expand...
 
Bye bye Firefox and Opera, hello Vivaldi and Brave.

I actually just downloaded Brave the other day, seems like its founded by the original founder of Mozilla/Firefox, so it may be worth looking into. I suppose we'll see.
 
So what are the best alternatives? I'm looking to switch now that I've read this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top