Help EFF Test a New Tool To Stop Creepy Online Tracking

An anonymous reader writes "EFF is launching a new extension for Firefox and Chrome called Privacy Badger. Privacy Badger automatically detects and blocks spying ads around the Web, and the invisible trackers that feed information to them. You can try it out today."

Comments

Ghostery

[Anonymous Coward]

Ghostery does a great job of this already... However, the problem with these types of tools is they frequently break some type of (needed) functionality on the site.

7 caught on Slashdot right now.

Re:Ghostery

[CRCulver]

Ghostery is under a proprietary license and Evidon, the company that owns it, is involved in the online advertising industry. I trust the EFF a lot more.

FWIW, though, you can get many of the same benefits of Ghostery without installing that plugin by simply processing its lists through a Privoxy filter (the conversion is fairly easy to script and then automate), so Privoxy zaps all those IPs before they even get to the browser.

Re:Ghostery

[Sir_Eptishous]

This is why I love slashdot. I had no idea Ghostery had such a conflict of interest. Thanks for that info.
From WP:
"Evidon, the company owning Ghostery, plays a dual role in the online advertising industry. Ghostery blocks sites from gathering personal information. But it does have an opt-in feature named GhostRank that can be checked to "support" them. GhostRank takes note of ads encountered and blocked, and sends that information, though anonymously, back to advertisers so they can better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked.[4]"

What's somewhat funny about it

[Opportunist]

Install it and it will show you a page where you can link to Twitter, Facebook and Google+ to tell people about how awesome it is.

Is that supposed to be cynical or ... I don't know, I find it kinda funny. Isn't it supposedly blocking pages like that?

Re:What's the difference

[crow]

This monitors the behavior of web sites, not the function. So if there's a non-advertising site that just puts out tracking bugs, it will get blocked. If there's an advertising site that doesn't send tracking cookies, it won't be blocked. There's no blacklist--it's all based on observed behavior.

Re:What's the difference

[Mashiki]

Also, NoScript specifically breaks 3 out of 4 websites until you figure out which half-a-dozen domains must execute JavaScript for each damn website.

I think you mean website developers are so reliant on JS these days, that they think they can't write a site without such heavy use of it that sneezing at it will break their site.

Search engine optimization

[tepples]

Maybe you just get half a sheet of text, or the first 1.3 windowfuls, then the site will pick up on the tracking bug being broken

If a web server is configured to deliver only the abstract to viewers behind user agents that include tracking countermeasures, then it will deliver only the abstract to search engines. They tend to retrieve pages with no JavaScript, no Referer, and no cookies.

Does it block Piwik Analytics?

[EmagGeek]

Because this is the tracker the EFF has on the download page for "Privacy Badger."

Re:One example: Slashdot's owner, Dice Holdings

[PopeRatzo]

I'm guessing that most web sites are made by young women who fancy themselves to be graphic designers

Get the fuck out with your stupid techie misogyny.

If your "guessing" involves generalization to the point of an ugly absurdity, you should check yourself. You make it sound like you have a particular beef, maybe with a particular woman (or women) and now you believe that all bad web code is caused by women. It's a bad place to be.

If you want to say, "I have encountered some young women who fancy themselves graphic designers..." you would at least be on more reasonable ground, but then you need to ask yourself, "Does the fact that this group of people were women really have any impact on my statement?"

Now knock it off. People get skeeved out by misogyny and it's pretty easy to pick up on, so the next time you're looking for a job you might just walk away wondering, "That didn't seem to go well, it's probably because of that woman who interviewed me. They're all whores you know".

Re:NAT and proxies

[SuricouRaven]

Problem:
1. Man goes to kinkybondagesmut.com on his PC.
2. Seven-year-old daughter goes to ad-funded sillychildishgame.com on iPad.
3. Ad-network consult their profile and determine this IP address is currently in used by an adult male with an interest in pornograhy.
4. Family consults their local moral crusader organisation. Legal action is taken.

Re:Your response is about your anger, not about wo

[PopeRatzo]

I'm interested to know what theories other people have about the poor use of Javascript.

You mean other than, "Bitches, man, they just don't know how to code, you know? *fistbump*"