Automatic No
September 29, 2022 1:14 PM   Subscribe

 
Giving it a test run, thanks.
posted by seanmpuckett at 1:57 PM on September 29 [1 favorite]


Sounds good to me, I'll take it for a spin!
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:01 PM on September 29 [1 favorite]


The Chrome extension is here, for convenience.
posted by sagc at 2:03 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


Please delete... the paper has info about Firefox, Safari and Chrome
posted by SoberHighland at 2:11 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


There's a Firefox version, too.
posted by box at 2:11 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


But in the arms race, the websites will try to give you an EXTRa tracker cookie if they figure out you're using this thing?
posted by aniola at 2:12 PM on September 29 [1 favorite]


This is my new munch handle.
posted by Abehammerb Lincoln at 2:31 PM on September 29 [6 favorites]


There's a bunch of these addons that try to handle cookie consent: I Don't Care About Cookies is popular (but sometimes agrees to tracking), there's Ninja Cookie, and there was some other one I used for awhile that was fairly good. But the problem with all of these is they invariably don't work everywhere and when they don't, they break in a bad way that breaks the site. I wish someone would make a conservative version which blocks the most popular cookie consent packages (like OneTrust) and then just gives up if it isn't sure it knows what to do.

BTW the EU rules for consent were really thoughtfully written
Consent should be given by a clear affirmative act establishing a freely given, specific, informed and unambiguous indication of the data subject’s agreement ... Silence, pre-ticked boxes or inactivity should not therefore constitute consent.
Most sites have interpreted that to mean that if the user does choose to engage with the cookie preferences, the defaults need to be off, which is better than I expected.

Of course the better thing for users would be some sort of browser setting, perhaps a standard Do Not Track Header that was invented in 2009. But Google, Facebook, and other surveillance businesses unilaterally declared they refused to support that. And so now it's open warfare.
posted by Nelson at 2:51 PM on September 29 [6 favorites]


Of course the better thing for users would be some sort of browser setting, perhaps a standard Do Not Track Header that was invented in 2009. But Google, Facebook, and other surveillance businesses unilaterally declared they refused to support that.

That’s not entirely what happened. Google was, at least in principle, on board.

What actually happened was that Microsoft shipped Edge with Do Not Track defaulted to On, rather than letting people opt in. As a result, it was immediately and unsalvageably sabotaged as an indicator of real user intent. That gave sites and advertisers a plausible justification for ignoring the whole thing, which they did.
posted by mhoye at 3:03 PM on September 29 [11 favorites]


Fair enough. More recently Apple went and blocked third party cookies and more in Safari, causing significant waves. Part of what I had in mind saying "open warfare".

I always appreciated the decision ~2002 Google made with the Google Toolbar analytics / tracking function. They required an actual decision from users, two choices presented more or less equally. An elegant UI for a more civilized age.
posted by Nelson at 3:17 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


I Don't Care About Cookies does often agree to tracking, but if you combine it with setting your browser to delete all cookies every time you close it, then you can quickly clear everything by just restarting the browser.
Most browsers can restore a previous session so it makes a pretty painless solution.
posted by Lanark at 3:22 PM on September 29 [1 favorite]


After playing around with EFF's cover your tracks tool (formerly "panopticlick"), I formed the conclusion that cookies are a bit of a red herring. They certainly help anyone who wants to track you, but they are pretty far from necessary.
posted by advil at 3:32 PM on September 29 [4 favorites]


Next someone needs to create an addon that pre-empts the "subscribe to our site" popups I've been seeing more and more of lately...
posted by Greg_Ace at 4:38 PM on September 29 [12 favorites]


I think that I'm making Firefox use a cookie whitelist without a browser extension by:

1. Setting "Enhanced Tracking Protection" to custom.
2. Setting the cookie blocking setting to "All Cookies (will cause websites to break)"
3. Excepting more trustworthy domains from cookie blocking by using the "Manage Exceptions..." button under "Cookies and Site Data".

It's not friendly, though.
posted by chinesefood at 4:40 PM on September 29 [3 favorites]


Description in settings says it can read password & credit card info. Serious question, why is this not a concern? Thanks
posted by anshuman at 4:50 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


Description in settings says it can read password & credit card info. Serious question, why is this not a concern? Thanks

Would be interesting for someone compare a hash of the Google-hosted extension, e.g., with the source-built plug.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 5:17 PM on September 29 [1 favorite]


Note that "I Don't Care About Cookies" just recently got bought by Avast, which has a bad reputation when it comes to privacy. I uninstalled it as soon as I saw that.
posted by nosewings at 5:43 PM on September 29 [10 favorites]


I formed the conclusion that cookies are a bit of a red herring. They certainly help anyone who wants to track you, but they are pretty far from necessary.

Trace is an extension I recently found for both Chrome and Firefox (and Iceraven on mobile) that blocks more kinds of fingerprinting than I realized existed. It doesn't seem to break too many websites.
posted by blue shadows at 6:41 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


Cookies are delicious delicacies
posted by alex_skazat at 6:47 PM on September 29 [2 favorites]


Next someone needs to create an addon that pre-empts the "subscribe to our site" popups I've been seeing more and more of lately...

Man, remember RSS? Those were good times.
posted by srboisvert at 2:20 AM on September 30 [6 favorites]


I am not good at any of this and generally just rely on uBlock Origin to... block all the things? Do these cookie-blocking extensions do something that the broader ad-blockers do not?
posted by Shepherd at 2:34 AM on September 30 [2 favorites]


Next someone needs to create an addon that pre-empts the "subscribe to our site" popups I've been seeing more and more of lately...

I have a bookmark in my taskbar that kills those - I just click it and gone. Use this:


javascript:(function()%7B(function%20()%20%7Bvar%20i%2C%20elements%20%3D%20document.querySelectorAll('body%20*')%3Bfor%20(i%20%3D%200%3B%20i%20%3C%20elements.length%3B%20i%2B%2B)%20%7Bif%20(getComputedStyle(elements%5Bi%5D).position%20%3D%3D%3D%20'fixed')%20%7Belements%5Bi%5D.parentNode.removeChild(elements%5Bi%5D)%3B%7D%7D%7D)()%7D)()
posted by DreamerFi at 4:24 AM on September 30 [4 favorites]


"I Don't Care About Cookies" just recently got bought by Avast

There is a Fork of "I don't care about cookies" here: I Still Don't Care About Cookies.
posted by Lanark at 5:49 AM on September 30 [3 favorites]


Do these cookie-blocking extensions do something that the broader ad-blockers do not?

The OP isn't really about a cooking blocking thing.

You know how so many sites when you go to them pop up a little window that asks if you're willing to accept cookies or not? This project is to let you decide ahead of time what your answers to the popup questions are, and then when the popup happens, to answer them for you, so you aren't interrupted by the popups.

If those don't bug you then probably you can ignore it.
posted by RustyBrooks at 7:14 AM on September 30 [2 favorites]


sounds like a woo-girl shot. 'like, can we get four consent-o-matics for our table? thnk yoooo.'
posted by j_curiouser at 7:44 AM on September 30 [1 favorite]


I have a bookmark in my taskbar that kills those - I just click it and gone.

Is it persistent? For ex, if I go back to the site after closing the tab on which I clicked that, will I still not get that pop-up? How about if I go to a different page on the same site?
posted by a non mouse, a cow herd at 10:23 AM on September 30 [1 favorite]


What actually happened was that Microsoft shipped Edge with Do Not Track defaulted to On, rather than letting people opt in. As a result, it was immediately and unsalvageably sabotaged as an indicator of real user intent. That gave sites and advertisers a plausible justification for ignoring the whole thing, which they did.
Why would people want to be tracked? I understand you're right about the dynamics of how making it on by default leads to a response of ignoring that setting, but in terms of what people are likely to want, it seems like the absolutely right default.

I recently went to this talk (video should be up on the Strange Loop YouTube channel soon) and it seems like a much, much better model. Though I struggle to see how we'll get there given the current power dynamics in tech and gov't.
posted by Cogito at 11:24 AM on September 30 [4 favorites]


« Older Another One Bites The Dust At Google   |   This isn't how grief goes Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments