Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Chrome Beta Adds Privacy Controls, Translation Option

Posted by Soulskill on from the on-the-campaign-trail dept.

billandad writes "Anyone would think the timing was deliberate; just as Microsoft is forced into giving users the option to switch from IE via the browser ballot screen, so Google introduces a new Chrome beta with enhanced privacy features to chisel away at Microsoft's market share. '... you can control how browser cookies, images, JavaScript, plug-ins, and pop-ups are handled on a site-by-site basis. For example, you can set up cookie rules to allow cookies specifically only for sites that you trust, and block cookies from untrusted sites.' The new beta also adds language detection, and will prompt the user to translate a page if it's written in a foreign tongue."

19 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. Google? Privacy? by Sporkinum · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I really don't trust Google with privacy. I really wouldn't trust their browser for that. That being said, I like Chrome for the way it can applicationize a website. The only thing I use Chrome for is to run slacker radio as an app in linux.

    --
    "He's lost in a 'floyd hole"
    1. Re:Google? Privacy? by nellim · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Okay - chromium can be made safe, but not Chrome. Chrome + Vbox machine + Wireshark = Proof of concept. Chrome talks to google servers no matter what settings you put them on. Good luck with privacy.

    2. Re:Google? Privacy? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm a bit the same. On technical grounds, I'd like to use Chrome instead of the increasingly bloated Firefox, and given sufficient privacy and security safeguards I could live without the other plug-ins I use.

      But Chrome comes from Google, and releases often with an auto-updating mechanism. Given both Google's form for being wildly off-target on privacy issues (Buzz, etc.) and the openly dismissive/arrogant attitude exhibited by some of their senior executives, I just don't trust them not to pull a fast one and start logging every page I visit, or sneaking in ads at the browser level, or something along those lines.

      Perhaps this could theoretically be avoided by careful checking of the small print before each update, or adjusting certain settings so things don't happen automatically, but I don't want to have to do that sort of thing just to be able to update my web browser safely and make sure no-one's sneaked anything in. I'll just use another browser instead.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    3. Re:Google? Privacy? by sopssa · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's the usual trick. The privacy settings conveniently ignore any such issue and only concentrate on the client side things like "private tab" or cookie handling. Of course, if you don't want to go completely white-list based (and most users don't), there's no way to explicitly block certain domains like google-analytics.com.

      Of course it's convenient for Google to call only that privacy and completely ignore the fact that every Chrome installation has identifier about where you downloaded it, when you installed it, an unique identifier, everything you type to browser bar is sent to Google, any domain you visit is sent to Google, and so on...

    4. Re:Google? Privacy? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Look at SRWare Iron - Chrome without the Google tie-in

      Edit: There is an HORRIFIC flash slide-in advertisement in their site. Easy to close, innocuous content, but it appears on Every. Single. Page. I just decided not to update my version of Iron.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    5. Re:Google? Privacy? by sopssa · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Within Chrome. Of course you can use some 3rd party apps, but that's not an excuse not to have it.

      Also just FYI, Ad blockers on Chrome don't stop the http requests being made, they just hide ads. It's useless for blocking data gathering services because your info is still being sent.

  2. I'm still looking for another feature.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..where some websites have allowed cookies that don't get deleted on browser exit [firefox]
    I have the clearing history enabled (for cookies and logins only), but every time not only the "untrusted cookies" are deleted, but also the "trusted" ones. Default rule is to store cookies until I close Firefox.

    I searched for extensions, but no luck.

    A whitelist based on some cookies criteria (regexp or such) would be the icing on the cake.

  3. adblock? ADBLOCK!! (enchantments!) by araczynski · · Score: 0, Interesting

    just saw that there's an Adblock for chrome too! definitely have a reason to try the new browser now...curious to see how it compares to firefox.

    --
    sigs suck
  4. Re:A bright future for the web... by sopssa · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I wonder, why MS wouldn't just get over it and discontinue the development of its monstrous browser. They've lost the browser war, why wouldn't they put their resources elsewhere?

    At least IE8 is better than its predecessors and IE9 looks even better, but still..

    This is like saying:

    "I wonder, why MS wouldn't just get over it and discontinue the development of Windows. They've lost the OS war to Linux, why wouldn't they put their resources elsewhere?

    At least Vista is better than its predecessors and Windows 7 looks even better, but still.."

    IE still has 62% marketshare. Would you really call that a lost war? Besides, if you read slashdot, some of the people working with IE9 have commented here about the standards compliance and bringing IE9 up to bar with other browsers in other areas too. They're at least taking it very seriously and it looks like times have been changing for a few years now. IE8 is still the only browser with sandboxing too, all Firefox, Opera and Chrome are missing that.

  5. Re:A bright future for the web... by zach_the_lizard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'll believe that IE9 is up to par with the other browsers when I see it; from what I have heard, they have no plans to add things like the video tag to IE9, so that's at least one thing that will not be up to par with the rest of the world. I have a friend who works at MS and he forwarded my complaints about the lack of the video tag and canvas tag, and the IE guys didn't even seem to have that on the agenda.

    --
    SSC
  6. Re:Choices by SimonTheSoundMan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Coming along so well?

    They haven't even implemented simple things such as a bookmark manager or extensions on a Mac yet. It has a looong way to go.

  7. Re:A bright future for the web... by sopssa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Video tag is such a mess currently that I'm not surprised if they didn't spend much of their energy on it. Also, if they did, it means they'll side with Apple and Google to H.264's side. This leaves Firefox and Opera alone with Theora. It's not that IE9 isn't up to par with video tag support, it's that video tag itself is far from ready. We will still be using Flash for a long time.

    If I remember correctly, they do have canvas support and improved javascript performance though, and most importantly, they're going for standards compliance.

  8. Security changes won't make me switch by odin84gk · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Security features are nice, but they aren't a selling point. I won't change browsers to prevent tracking cookies. I don't know that much about javascript, and I don't mind most of the ads that I see. Ad block plus has been doing just fine with the pop-ups, and I don't care about those other things.

    Translating foreign pages? That is interesting. I run into a fair amount of Chinese datasheets.

    Just give me the web page as fast as possible, and keep my videos as smooth as possible. After that, I don't really care.

  9. Re:Hidden in plain sight by ChienAndalu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You haven't read all the source code of Firefox I suppose?

  10. Re:Choices by cerberusss · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They haven't even implemented simple things such as a bookmark manager or extensions on a Mac yet. It has a looong way to go.

    Extensions work on the Mac beta version. I don't use bookmarks, so can't comment on that.

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
  11. Re:Hidden in plain sight by Goaway · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Iron is basically a scam by some guy who bashes Google to drive more traffic to his Google Ads. Don't encourage an asshole by using his browser.

    (And why on earth would you trust some random guy on the internet in the first place?)

  12. Re:Privacy by Goaway · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Iron was created by a person who's admitted that he's spreading FUD about Google just to drive traffic to his site so he can make money off his ads. Is that the kind of project you want to cheer for?

  13. Re:Choices by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I suspect bookmarks have become a thing of the past. I have one hell of a lot of them, but my typical resource these days is a Google enquiry. 99% of the time it gets me just what I need, and that's fine.

    Over the last 18 years or so I have taken some pains to maintain a logical and useful bookmarks file, but I've approached a limit. I can foresee a time in the not too distant future when I will stop bothering to manage or even keep bookmarks at all. The drawback to this is that Google has that much more control over what I get to see, but if I voluntarily cede that control through laziness, what more can I expect?

  14. Re:Interface by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The main reason I use Chrome is because of the excellent interface. When maximized, the tabs push right against the screen edge. I've not seen any app that makes such efficient usage of screen real estate. I've tried to configure FireFox, using TinyMenu to reduce the amount of white space. But it's still not as efficient.

    Chrome had set a new trend for browser UIs. For example, the just-released Opera 10.50, out of the box, largely copies Chrome UI in default configuration, complete with tabs-in-title-bar. I suspect Firefox will follow suit eventually.