Slashdot Mirror


European Internet Users Urged To Protect Themselves Against Facebook Tracking

An anonymous reader writes: Belgium's Privacy Protection Commission says that Facebook tramples on European privacy laws by tracking people online without their consent and dodges questions from national regulators. They have issued a set of recommendations for both Facebook, website owners and end users. Net-Security reports: "The recommendations are based on the results of an extensive analysis of Facebook's revised policies and terms (rolled out on January 30, 2015) conducted by the inter-university research center EMSOC/SPION, which concluded that the company is acting in violation of European law. According to them Facebook places too much burden on its users to protect their privacy, and then doesn't offer simple tools and settings to do so, and sets up some problematic default settings. They also don't provide adequate information for users to make informed choices."

147 comments

  1. Facebook isn't free by saloomy · · Score: 1, Troll

    Your data is a form of payment and you submit to authorizing facebook to use it when you sign up. Why shouldn't Europeans abide by the contract they willfully sign? Facebook is not a public utility, you are not forced to consume it.

    1. Re:Facebook isn't free by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Informative

      Even if you don't sign up or consent they collect data on you. Those like "like" buttons on every page are spying on you, tracking you.

      Install uBlock and Privacy Badger to opt out.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you'd read TFA you'd notice that Facebook tracks the activity of non-users. Pages with Facebook widgets on them create a cookie with a UUID that allows them to follow your activity to all other pages that have those widges.

    3. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem here is that they track you even if you have *not* signed that contract (i.e. don't have an account).

    4. Re:Facebook isn't free by Polyneikos · · Score: 4, Informative

      (1) Facebook is tracking people who didn't "sign a contract" (as others have said), and (2) FB can't contract with people to do something illegal. The EU has privacy laws, and any contractual clause(s) which violates them is void.

    5. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's this thing called the law, and signing a contract does not exempt you from following it. To take an extreme example (that actually takes place all the time), signing a contract that makes you a slave does not make slavery legal.

    6. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Your data is a form of payment [...]

      And? People discovering sleazy behavior shouldn't call them out on it? Besides, the cookie tracking they do via other websites should be kept secret?

      That's BTW why I run with cookies disabled, even when websites and browser "vendors" (Mozilla, I'm looking at you!) are making that ever more dificcult, in the name of some Web 5.0 thing.

    7. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      hy shouldn't Europeans abide by the contract they willfully sign?

      Because luckily in most European countries a signature carries no value if it is used to approve a "contract" that contains illegal clauses. In this specific case, you're not "free" to accept an illegal treatment of your personal data. And we are very happy not to have this "freedom" of yours.

      However, I do think that facebook users, by being obvious retards (for the fact of having a facebook account), should not deserve to have their rights protected by courts.

    8. Re:Facebook isn't free by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      Your data is a form of payment and you submit to authorizing facebook to use it when you sign up. Why shouldn't Europeans abide by the contract they willfully sign? Facebook is not a public utility, you are not forced to consume it.

      Yes, what you write is correct, BUT:

      Facebook's tracking of users who do not own a Facebook account [...] the company tracks users who are logged-out from Facebook through the social plug-ins ("Like" and "Share" buttons), tracks opted-out Facebook users with a cookie for advertising purposes, tracks users who are not Facebook users but who have visited Facebook's pages, and so on.

      I don't own (never did) a Facebook account, but (and this is a fact) Facebook knows my name (with my foto connected to my name), people i know, other social/political/etc info about me.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    9. Re:Facebook isn't free by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Contractual clauses which violate US law are null and void in that country as well.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    10. Re:Facebook isn't free by Viol8 · · Score: 0

      Apparently you havent yet figured out how to delete cookies. Time to read your browsers help page perhaps.

    11. Re:Facebook isn't free by Xest · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because even if they were just tracking data of users who sign up, contrary to popular myth, peddled mostly by people who think they know the law but apparently don't, contracts are not magical legal instruments that overrule everything ever.

      In just about every jurisdiction in the world contracts have limits. They cannot overrule statutory rights, you cannot sign away your life in a contract, you cannot sign away your legal responsibility for a crime onto someone else poor and desperate enough to be willing to take it for money.

      Hence, it doesn't matter what is in a contract, if that contract doesn't adhere to the laws of the country in which the agreement is made then either the whole or that portion of the contract are meaningless and irrelevant.

      Facebook doesn't get to rewrite the law, so rather than blaming users for agreeing to a section of a contract that has no legal merit in the first place, you should be asking, "Why can't Facebook adhere to the laws of the countries in which it chooses to operate if it wishes to operate there?". That's the real question- you see, your question is meaningless; Europeans ARE abiding by the contract they wilfully sign because it's a meaningless contract with large portions that hold no legal merit in the first place. It's not their fault Facebook wrote a contract that tries to claim rights that it has no legal standing to claim - that's Facebook's fault, they should've drafted a contract that's wholly enforceable within the confines of the law.

      Most companies manage, but it seems a number of tech companies really struggle with it, because profit.

    12. Re:Facebook isn't free by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      And why Should Facebook consider it a contract for life and have no facility for deleting an acount?

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    13. Re:Facebook isn't free by Blaskowicz · · Score: 2

      Perhaps Privacy Badger is great but there are a few issues : knowing the extension du jour, possible browser slowdown (well, I think Mozilla Lightbeam did it), danger of launching an unprotected secondary browser or profile.

      You can do something like this at the hosts file : perhaps this one has unnecessary duplicate entries but it works (in particular "connect", "login" and cdn" are blocked out)

      127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 static.ak.fbcdn.net
      127.0.0.1 www.static.ak.fbcdn.net
      127.0.0.1 login.facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 www.login.facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 fbcdn.net
      127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.net
      127.0.0.1 fbcdn.com
      127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.com
      127.0.0.1 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 www.static.ak.connect.facebook.com
      127.0.0.1 threatexchange.fb.com
      127.0.0.1 fb.com
      127.0.0.1 www.fb.com
      127.0.0.1 newsroom.fb.com
      127.0.0.1 internet.org
      127.0.0.1 facebook.net
      127.0.0.1 www.facebook.net

    14. Re:Facebook isn't free by thsths · · Score: 1

      Yes, but non-US citizens have no legal. So under US law, US entities always beat non-US entities.

    15. Re:Facebook isn't free by Sique · · Score: 3, Informative

      To use a real world analogon: Burglary is still a crime, even if someone didn't lock his front door. Yes, you should lock the door. But it's still a crime to steal, even if you don't lock it. The Belgian Privacy Protection Commission now has listed some ways to lock your door - basicly they did already what you repeat now. Thus your remark could be rated "redundant".

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    16. Re:Facebook isn't free by fisted · · Score: 1

      If you think you're even close to enumerating the facebook DNS zone(s) there...well nevermind. I'm selling bridges, interested?

    17. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm opposed to enslaving people against their will in most cases, but if somebody is willing to engage in the engagement why should they be prevented?

      As I understand it people willingly did so in the past to discharge debts or maybe to get food and a roof over their heads.
      --
      (roman_mir, censured by the liberals again)

    18. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To me, using Like buttons like that should be illegal. By that I mean it should be made illegal, assuming it's not already. (American in the U.S.)

      What I'm getting at is that a third party site is tracking you when you visit certain sites. There's no way to opt in or out from it. It's a simple privacy violation regardless of what the present site says. The same goes for advertising links too.

    19. Re:Facebook isn't free by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      I should have left facebook.[your country tld] and www.facebook.[your country tld] in there and sure, all the other ones are missing, then there's stuff I don't know about. It's not that easy to find a list.
      I would block the IP ranges as they're given in a post here, but investigating about how to do it on a linux desktop is boring.

    20. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (roman_mir, censured by the liberals again) Please die in a fire (note, I'm not a liberal). But your constant bwahwahahaa the mean liiiberaaaallss bwahaha needs to stop. Permanently.

    21. Re:Facebook isn't free by zmooc · · Score: 1

      Those like "like" buttons on every page are spying on you

      That's nonsense; they're not spying at all. In fact, they do nothing. It's you that explicitly requested that button from Facebook, which merely keeps track of what you (or your browser) explicitly sent them.

      It's a total miracle that we're all hating Facebook while we should be hating our browser manufacturers for failing to properly protect us from sending shit all over the place. Even MS Outlook does a better job when it asks me whether I really want to load images from some server. Browsers should do the same; that'll end this bullshit in no-time.

      --
      0x or or snor perron?!
    22. Re:Facebook isn't free by Pentium100 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      A bit better:

      ssh your-router-ip

      iptables -F FB
      iptables -X FB
      iptables -N FB
      for ip in `whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934' | grep /`
      do
      iptables -A FB -o eth0 -d $ip -j REJECT
      done
      iptables -I FORWARD -o eth0 -j FB

    23. Re:Facebook isn't free by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      They're not stealing anything. Cookies always have been a tracking method so you can't complain when someone uses them to track you. Don't want to be tracked? Delete them.

      I'm really beginning to believe there should be the equivalent of a drivers license for using the internet. That way we'd keep all the whining idiots away from it.

    24. Re:Facebook isn't free by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      It is because of the fact the Facebook knew who I was that I got an account. At least now I can poison the well.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    25. Re:Facebook isn't free by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

      This may be a way to deal with the problem, but i would prefer not to have the problem from the begining

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    26. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook operates in Europe thorough their Irish subsidiary. TFA ends with "Facebook maintains that, as regards the privacy of European citizens, it only needs to conform to Irish law, as its European center is based in Dublin" so FB knows that they are under European law there.

    27. Re:Facebook isn't free by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Those like "like" buttons on every page are spying on you

      That's nonsense; they're not spying at all. In fact, they do nothing.

      Amazing how people who are completely wrong can speak with such authority.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    28. Re:Facebook isn't free by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Apparently you havent yet figured out how to delete cookies. Time to read your browsers help page perhaps.

      So much more than deleting cookies, muchacho. Better be blocking scripts as well.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    29. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're suggesting that websites should be restricted to load resources from their domain only? That seems excessive and would break most (all?) of the heaviest trafficked sites.

    30. Re:Facebook isn't free by fisted · · Score: 1

      Oh well.

    31. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      They are accused of tracking people who never signed up to Facebook and who never agreed to be tracked through the use of the like buttons. They don't need nor use cookies to track you. With a script they can reveal a lot of information of your browser, add ons, ip, operating system, last visited page, etc... That information is almost like DNA and can identify you while you browse the internet. This is how Facebook tracks you without ever needing to place a cookie on your computer. They create a shadow profile with this information which is saved on their server and not your computer. You can't request information of your shadow profile, nor delete that shadowprofile.
       
      Facebook thinks they have every right to track everyone, even those who don't want to be tracked. The Belgian privacy commission says they go too far and that they invade the privacy of people who are not logged into Facebook. It is now up to the judge to decide whether Facebook is allowed to track everyone without consent or whether they breach privacy. The result of this case will have consequences for Facebook in the EU.

      The only way to fool Facebook is to use multiple computers with different operating systems and browsers and different ISP's and not by deleting cookies.

    32. Re: Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. I'm not sure how Ireland has implemented the EU cookie directive, but Facebook's tracking is a clear violation of the (rather draconian) Danish implementation, that requires explicit user consent before setting any cookie that isn't required for the operation of the site.

    33. Re:Facebook isn't free by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      I would prefer it didn't exist as well but it does so you can either attempt to mitigate by getting your real world friends to quit tagging you in shit and mentioning you in posts (not likely) or try to leave a mess in your wake. I don't tag anyone correctly and will often go out of my way to post complete bull shit. The most recent was the saga of moving to Havana now that US relations have thawed. I mean why not, it is just slightly less real than everyone's Facebook lives where they push stupid pictures and mind vomit around.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    34. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only that were true.
      Facebook tracks EVERYONE, members and non members alike via the "Like" button on pages.

      Facebook build up profiles on you based on this and information your friends/Family/Workplace/Social Groups post on Facebook, including photos.

      Facebook also scours publicly available information on other web pages to build up a fuller profile. It would not surprise me to find out that Facebook also buys metrics from other web services, i.e. time/IP address info, so even if you have a blocker they can still track you, more slowly and with less precision, but track you they will.

      Using Facial Recognition they are able to track you in other peoples photos, they can tell you age, race, gender, political and religious beliefs, your shopping habits, education level, income level, residential address, etc etc etc etc etc.

      And they have done this all without you joining.

      Your life, your information is like a cryptic crossword puzzle, they can fill in gaps based on statistical probability, and the more info they have, the easier filling those gaps in becomes.

    35. Re:Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doors have always been a method for entering a building so you can't complain when someone uses it to enter your house...

    36. Re:Facebook isn't free by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      That's completely orthogonal to my point. But thanks for playing.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    37. Re: Facebook isn't free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no such thing as "European law" or whatever. There is only Obama's will.

  2. Facebook is a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The only way to win is not to play.

    K-line their links and widgets in your browsers. Don't feed the beast.

    1. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      I prefer to feed the beast garbage.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Wootery · · Score: 2

      These are both good approaches. They're the first 2 on Schneier's list of the 4 ways to "protect yourself from digital surveillance".

    3. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I prefer to feed the beast garbage.

      Could you share how you do that?

    4. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only way to win is not to play.

      Even when you don't play, you're still in the game.

    5. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The beast can tell garbage from information. Made up data sticks out in statistical analyses. Grandparent is right: The only winning move is not to play.

      Facebook is autonomous system 32934. You can look up their address space with whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934'

      Currently: 204.15.20.0/22 69.63.176.0/20 66.220.144.0/20 66.220.144.0/21 69.63.184.0/21 69.63.176.0/21 74.119.76.0/22 69.171.255.0/24 173.252.64.0/18 69.171.224.0/19 69.171.224.0/20 103.4.96.0/22 69.63.176.0/24 173.252.64.0/19 173.252.70.0/24 31.13.64.0/18 31.13.24.0/21 66.220.152.0/21 66.220.159.0/24 69.171.239.0/24 69.171.240.0/20 31.13.64.0/19 31.13.64.0/24 31.13.65.0/24 31.13.67.0/24 31.13.68.0/24 31.13.69.0/24 31.13.70.0/24 31.13.71.0/24 31.13.72.0/24 31.13.73.0/24 31.13.74.0/24 31.13.75.0/24 31.13.76.0/24 31.13.77.0/24 31.13.96.0/19 31.13.66.0/24 173.252.96.0/19 69.63.178.0/24 31.13.78.0/24 31.13.79.0/24 31.13.80.0/24 31.13.82.0/24 31.13.83.0/24 31.13.84.0/24 31.13.85.0/24 31.13.86.0/24 31.13.87.0/24 31.13.88.0/24 31.13.89.0/24 31.13.90.0/24 31.13.91.0/24 31.13.92.0/24 31.13.93.0/24 31.13.94.0/24 31.13.95.0/24 69.171.253.0/24 69.63.186.0/24 31.13.81.0/24 179.60.192.0/22 179.60.192.0/24 179.60.193.0/24 179.60.194.0/24 179.60.195.0/24 185.60.216.0/22 45.64.40.0/22 185.60.216.0/24 185.60.217.0/24 185.60.218.0/24 185.60.219.0/24 129.134.0.0/16 157.240.0.0/16 204.15.20.0/22 69.63.176.0/20 69.63.176.0/21 69.63.184.0/21 66.220.144.0/20 69.63.176.0/20

    6. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by ULTROS · · Score: 1

      Elaborate please. Do you have some plugin that feeds it false data?

    7. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      No, I have an account with facebook. The only problem is that it's a dog. None of my personal information is there. Only a picture of my dog, and a few stories about my dog. So all the data collected by the account, browsing history, tracking, etc, is all well and good. How the plan to market this however... how old am I? Where do I work? Why do I have a penchant for liking doggy things? Heck, what sex am I? Sure they can probably extrapolate that through my history. But at the end of the day if they want to sell my data, all they can show is that they have data on a dog, who they THINK is actually a person. Now, how much you do say you want to pay for that?

      Of course they can always come after me for violating their TOS and close the account. Awww. And if they try any legal action I'm sure my lawyer will explain to them that dogs can't be expected to read and understand a TOS click-through...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    8. Re:Facebook is a honeypot by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      Just like things that you really don't care about at all. For a long while Facebook thought I was a gay Jew who was looking for a Jamaican lover, yes there are ads targeting this demographic. Also in photos I post if there are people in them I will put names but never correct names, but more of a generic description. I especially like it when the facial recognition fucks up and things there is a face in a cloud, bushes, the grass, etc. and there I will do stuff like tag myself or someone I know as being the fake face. Add in that I like uploading pictures of art and I tag away at those faces, if it is a statue of Zeus I tag it as myself. I tag locations of pictures incorrectly as well as listing my job, and home location incorrectly, and changing them every so often. Then just toss in some random posts about very random things (I have posted some Base64 encoded /dev/urandom output), as well as typing up a post but not actually posting it (there was an article about facebook using info from unposted posts a while back) and it becomes easy to poison their well. Also given that the US government sucks up a lot of public data from places like facebook I get to poison their wells also.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  3. The free society rub by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This is why "free" is never "free". The internet is mostly based on private enterprise supporting its own sites or advertisement providing the funding. Facebook is no different and relies heavily on finding ways to support all those "free" users. Its interesting, because I wonder how popular these sites like Facebook would be if the end user had to pay for everything in return for no ads, no unwanted loss of privacy? But everyone should know that when you visit a web site you may be providing more information then you want and it may be that you allowed it to happen because you want "free".

    1. Re:The free society rub by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it wouldn't matter if you could pay for a ad free Facebook. They would still track you and sell your data so the advertisers can show ads on the sites you didn't pay for. You can also pay Google for a business account and can choose to not show ads on the services of that business account. This doesn't stop them from tracking you.

  4. pity the link to the recommendations pdf is a 404. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pity the link to the recommendations pdf is a 404.

    Anyone know where I can get the real thing?

  5. Lost link to report found, and "site owners" by colfer · · Score: 3, Informative

    The link to the actual report in TFA is broken, as it was on the Belgian commission's own site until a few moments ago. So here it is:
    http://www.privacycommission.b...

    The recommendations for site owners is to enhance the cookie opt-in banner that you already see on European sites. A cookie for cookies! It's buried deep in the heavily enumerated document, so I'll quote it in full:

    To Website Owners
    Relating to website owners or webmasters who wish to use the social plug-ins offered by Facebook, the Privacy Commission refers to its own-initiative recommendation on the use of cookies, in which it stipulates that owners must properly inform visitors of their website and obtain the latter's specific consent for cookies and other meta files of which they may not control re-use. In this context, the Privacy Commission refers to social networks, among others, and recommends that social network buttons are not activated until users have given their specific consent. The current integration possibilities of social plug-ins offered by Facebook, however, do not meet these criteria yet. For the time being, the Privacy Commission therefore recommends to use tools such as "Social Share Privacy" ( http://panzi.github.io/SocialS... ) as a way to obtain user consent. By using a tool such as "Social Share Privacy", third-party plug-ins do not connect to third-party servers (and consequently data are not sent to third parties) until users have clicked on the social plug-in.

  6. The European Union's health by execthis · · Score: 1

    I'm glad to see the EU handle Facebook as the disease that it is.

  7. Politics fails to protect the people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Politicians are practically falling over themselves while rushing to give the people's privacy to Facebook, Google, etc. Everything else is just sweet-talk to placate the critics. Telling people to protect themselves is the height of insolence. Everybody wants to know what everybody else is doing, who they're talking to, and they make the laws to all but prevent privacy. You can't even get a SIM card without "papers please" in many European countries. They compel ISPs to record all sorts of metadata, even in violation of constitutional laws. The telecoms happily oblige - they know the value of that data. And then they have the audacity to tell people that they're in charge of their own privacy!

    Facebook is blacklisted here, with every technical measure that I can throw at them. Fat lot of good that does, as everybody else still uses Facebook and gives them everything they have about me. But I'm urged to protect myself against Facebook tracking. Fuckers.

  8. /etc/hosts file paranoia by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Informative

    The one (microscopically tiny) thing APK isn't batshit crazy about:

    127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com facebook.com
    127.0.0.1 www.static.ak.fbcdn.net static.ak.fbcdn.net
    127.0.0.1 www.login.facebook.com login.facebook.com
    127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.net fbcdn.net
    127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.com fbcdn.com
    127.0.0.1 www.static.ak.connect.facebook.com static.ak.connect.facebook.com
    127.0.0.1 www.static.ak.facebook.com static.ak.facebook.com

    1. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can you use wild cards in a host file reliably?

    2. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately no, you can't use wildcards in hosts files. You can however set up your own DNS resolver to block entire domains with all their subdomains. It's really quite easy, even on your Windows desktop system, and you get DNSSEC verification on top: Unbound. If you use an OpenWRT router, you can install Unbound there and block domains for all your devices in one go.

    3. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      No - you can't use wildcards in hosts. It is however pretty trivial to sinkhole entire domains using DNS if you have your own server - best of all you should only need a single zone file, and you can then point multiple domains, or even TLDs, at it. Tie that into your anti-spam solution (if sender domain resolves to 127.0.0.1, reject mail) and and you have a pretty compact solution for wholesale filtering of junk that still allows for fine control over whitelisting if need be.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    4. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      General question:

      What prevents Facebook from having a piece of .js embedded (added) to it's widgets that simply reports IP/Date/URL/Browser information/FB cookie on every user that finished loading the page the widget was embedded on, but not the widget itself?

      You can host it using a generic CDN, make sure you're users know it's necessary for "diagnostic features".

      Convoluted yes, but there is a sea of ways to bypass simple hosts configurations.

    5. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by execthis · · Score: 1

      I think its better to use NoScript and just block the domains

    6. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you use 127.0.0.1 your web browser will try to connect to localhost.
      If you run a web server, this will result in a 404 and weird content on your pages.
      If you don't run a web server, this will result in a delay while the web browser unsuccessfully attempts to connect.

      Instead, you should use 0.0.0.0 which is a null route that fails immediately.

    7. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alright, thanks! I'm going to see if I can make something useful outof pfSense and Unbound. Was thinking about renewing my local network at home anyway so this is a great time to stuff in all these too.

    8. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by jafiwam · · Score: 1

      If you use 127.0.0.1 your web browser will try to connect to localhost. If you run a web server, this will result in a 404 and weird content on your pages. If you don't run a web server, this will result in a delay while the web browser unsuccessfully attempts to connect.

      Instead, you should use 0.0.0.0 which is a null route that fails immediately.

      No.

      No local web server results in rejection by the OS, which is very fast.

      Some web SITES on the other hand, use things like load-time include content that mucks up pages. But in general using the localhost IP is very fast.

    9. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do this at system startup:

      #!/bin/bash
      # Block facebook
      for ip in $(whois -h whois.radb.net '!gAS32934' | grep /)
      do
          iptables -A FORWARD -p all -d $ip -j REJECT
          iptables -A OUTPUT -p all -d $ip -j REJECT
      done

    10. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they made it report that information back to one of the Facebook domains, it would defeat the purpose, as those domains are still blocked. If they made it report to a generic CDN domain, that domain could be added to the list of known Facebook domains as well. Besides, they could load the widget from there in the first place. Obviously it's as much a cat and mouse game as web ads and the blocking of web ads. The next step after blocking domains with all subdomains is to null-route entire autonomous systems. They may not want to make people go there.

    11. Re:/etc/hosts file paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem: Windows runs a 'webserver' service by default in end user models of Windows in the Windows Media Network Sharing Service which is set automatic started by default http://www.sevenforums.com/tut... . Correct me if I am wrong.

  9. Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many people might find facebook something to think about when voting...

    A nutjob got elected here because he promised (and kept the promise) to change some laws to allow the iPhone (1) to be sold here without having to buy it internationally.

  10. I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritical by cloud.pt · · Score: 2

    I believe most companies nowadays are using opt-out, "bad user default settings" schemes and most of them simply won't move away from it, well, because it just works so well with their ad-based and big data business model. And you know what? I'm fine with that, it's so much better than a subscription. With that said, there There are only 2 reasons why people deserve the privacy violations they are put through:

    1. 1. It is fundamented payback for something morally wrong they have done, like a fair court order on suspicious activities
    2. 2. THEY ARE IGNORANT TO THE POINT THEY WILL DISREGARD ALL WARNING AND CIRCUMVENTION MEASURES AVAILABLE AGAINST SUCH VIOLATIONS

    So, to be totally honest, I know the harm I'm put through while using Facebook, I know ways to circumvent most of it, and the harm I can't avoid is my own damn fault for posting socially awkward information/comment/photo of myself.

    The bottom line is that Facebook-user relations aren't much different from a state-citizen one: when I go about my life in my country of "choice" (i.e. where I happened to be born or end up), I am also supposed to have some kind of omniscience of all types of law, such as fiscal (taxes), penal (crimes), environmental, etc, and even all my own damn rights. Either that or to have the income to hire "omniscient entities" in each of those fields. Only then I become a "perfect citizen" in the eyes of the state, as I abide to every form of policy my country, the EU, and the F'ing UN imposed on me. So the EU doesn't like Facebook for pretty much acting the way they do. That is a load of bull.

  11. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem is that FB also tracks non-fb-users. You can't opt-out from this.

  12. Fucking Communists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Fuck those communists in Europe. Facebook is America and America is Freedom. It is their patriotic duty to allow themselves to be monitored and everyone owes a debt of patriotism to America, whether they're American or not!

    1. Re:Fucking Communists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      America has not been about freedom for many many years.

      America is about money and military spending, oh and putting people in prison.

      Is American health system Number 1, No
      Is America the least corrupt country, No
      Is America the most democratic country, No
      Is America the most free country, No
      Is the American education system Number 1, No
      Is America the safest country in the world , No
      Is America the biggest economy, No
      Are Americans more socially mobile than other countries, No

  13. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't say "bottom line is..." and then state several alternate lines with a slight alternate rant. Also, hypocrisy is an overated critique. It's like calling a clansman a racist. More like the EU calling Facebook overbearing! Bottom line is nobody is from the EU. The EU is a made up political front man designed to take strip the last vestiges of humanity from neanderthals. Next time just say "zuckerberg is a lyeing, theiving jew-boy" It's a better argument.

  14. Simple? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just nullroute facebook.com and virtually every other sub-domain.

  15. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess you think the EU is also hypocritical because they allow countries in the EU to have an army, but companies not? Political oversight and companies are not the same thing at all and, of course, are held to different standards.

  16. For the best possible hosts file? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

    ---

    A.) Hosts do more than:

    1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... )
    2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
    3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

    C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

    D.) Hosts files yield more:

    1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
    2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
    3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
    4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

    ---

    * Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

    * Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    (Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

    ...apk

    1. Re:For the best possible hosts file? by beerbear · · Score: 1

      Can you please just go away? Or at least present your information in a clear and readable manner? Non of that @ and + and & bullshit. This ain't perl.

      --
      Hold my beer and watch this!
    2. Re:For the best possible hosts file? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apk didn't note hosts first. Apk's kicking your asses with facts for it is all. Go cry in your cereal elsewhere troll or get on topic at least. Want to bitch to someone, bitch at NoNonAlphaCharsHere http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    3. Re:For the best possible hosts file? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like having APK around, he's like a quaint throwback to the 80s and 90s when shareware was cool, and getting your low quality cruft into a PC magazine was all the rage.

      Of course, nowadays he's like a comical waste of space, espousing really low quality awful looking software that anyone sane wouldn't touch with a barge pole in the corporate world and putting forward ideas, that are, frankly, stupid.

      So I'd like to vote that APK remain, nostalgia is great, and APK is a "tech guy" from a different era, the guy that got left behind. He's the sort of barely above amateur PC repair shop monkey that preys on really technologically ignorant grandparents to make a living, but who also look to him as a genius, and both part ways happy all the same when he's done some menial task like reinstall windows to remove a bit of malware for them whilst also throwing on his "free tool".

      He thinks he's a genius, the old folks tell him so, he doesn't know any better, and the rest of us get to chuckle and reminisce about how we too started out that way a long long time ago until we actually became professionals who learnt and prefer to do things properly, understanding the downsides of his amateur approach (like not wanting to have to sift through 600,000 fucking host file entries each time you do a DNS resolution).

  17. Use their tracking agasint them by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 2


    Just fill out false information, post pictures that are not you, tag things incorrectly, feed the bots dust til they choke.

    If you think about it's possible to loop their own ads back to them...just help spread the advertisement.

    They agreed to these conditions when they accept me as a user.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    1. Re:Use their tracking agasint them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Facebook doesn't care about the information you enter in your profile, but cares about what you do online. What you do is what you are interested in. What does it matter to Facebook if you say you have long dark curly hair, a red skin with white dots and a long nose and like to ride a unicycle while singing the latest Justin Bieber songs in a Dub Step version? What Facebook cares about is the sites and pages you frequently visit to create 'an anonymous profile' that can be sold.

    2. Re:Use their tracking agasint them by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      I am not too sure about the "feed false data" approach. What if the false data happens to provide a much more negative image of you than your real data?
      At least with your real information you can kind of figure out how you are being cataloged by the spying, but what picture does false data paint? Could it potentially label you as a possible criminal/deviant/etc because of some unthinkable combination of false data? What if you stumble upon a combination that relates you to some hate group by accident?

      I think the approach of blocking them at /etc/hosts or router level is more reliable than that, honestly. Better for them to have very little to no data than data that can paint an unwanted picture.

  18. DNS uses more moving parts & power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A.) Running another program (sometimes in usermode no less, far, Far, FAR slower than kernelmode by many orders of magnitude & easily attacked) vs. the single hosts file (tightly integrated into the IP stack itself as part of it). ADDING COMPLEXITY & MORE "moving parts" room for error & breakdown!

    B.) Wasting CPU cycles, RAM memory, & other forms of I/O to do what a single file can do

    C.) Wasting ELECTRICITY (especially if the DNS server is setup as a separate machine) even if run as a service/daemon on a single system as user has

    D.) DNS has NUMEROUS faults, & should anyone request a sampling of them? Ask & "ye shall receive" (see my 'p.s.' below...).

    * Hosts files are better on those grounds alone... by far.

    (Hosts yield FASTER host-domain name resolution locally vs. remote DNS servers, especially if a NXDOMAIN results (since you do it LOCALLY via verified hardcoded hosts file entries of your favorites @ the TOP of a custom hosts file, which also gets you speed too as noted, but also reliability vs. downed DNS (happens a LOT) + security by overcoming a 1/2 decade unpatched vs. Kaminsky bug worldwide on MOST DNS SERVERS still, in that flaw & yes, others!))

    APK

    P.S.=> You're adding on MORE complexity/difficulty as well as room for breakdown + exploit & using more power AND other resources needlessly vs. using something already native to the OS & tightly integrated into the TCP/IP stack itself in kernelmode... apk

    1. Re:DNS uses more moving parts & power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with most of your points in principle, especially the complexity argument, but not with this one:

      to do what a single file can do

      You can't use wildcards in hosts files. If Facebook starts giving every web site a different subdomain to load their widgets from, they will render the hosts file completely ineffective. A DNS resolver can do what a hosts file can't do. You're trying to eat soup with a fork.

  19. DNS = piling on more complexity + power use by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A.) Running another program (sometimes in usermode no less, far, Far, FAR slower than kernelmode by many orders of magnitude & easily attacked) vs. the single hosts file (tightly integrated into the IP stack itself as part of it). ADDING COMPLEXITY & MORE "moving parts" room for error & breakdown!

    B.) Wasting CPU cycles, RAM memory, & other forms of I/O to do what a single file can do

    C.) Wasting ELECTRICITY (especially if the DNS server is setup as a separate machine) even if run as a service/daemon on a single system as user has

    D.) DNS has NUMEROUS faults, & should anyone request a sampling of them? Ask & "ye shall receive" (see my 'p.s.' below...).

    * Hosts files are better on those grounds alone... by far.

    (Hosts yield FASTER host-domain name resolution locally vs. remote DNS servers, especially if a NXDOMAIN results (since you do it LOCALLY via verified hardcoded hosts file entries of your favorites @ the TOP of a custom hosts file, which also gets you speed too as noted, but also reliability vs. downed DNS (happens a LOT) + security by overcoming a 1/2 decade unpatched vs. Kaminsky bug worldwide on MOST DNS SERVERS still, in that flaw & yes, others!))

    Plus, rules tables in DNS are more complex, by far, vs. simple easily texteditor edited hosts files.

    APK

    P.S.=> You're adding on MORE complexity/difficulty as well as room for breakdown + exploit & using more power AND other resources needlessly vs. using something already native to the OS & tightly integrated into the TCP/IP stack itself in kernelmode... apk

    1. Re:DNS = piling on more complexity + power use by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      And yet, despite all those flawed arguments, you still failed to answer the OP's question. No one is saying DNS is perfect, but sometimes you need a different tool to solve a problem, and unless you can provide some hack/workaround to allow an arbitrary list of subdomains/hosts using nothing more than a hosts file, this is one of those times.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:DNS = piling on more complexity + power use by matfud · · Score: 1

      Many people are already running a router 24/7 so electricity usage is not a problem
      All operating systems cache DNS lookups. And since the facebook ones are on many many web pages they do tend to be cached so this is not slow.
      DNS lookups are quite infrequent when compared to the amount of data transferred so "slow" is probably not going to be noticeable.
      Running your own DNS server (locally on your machine) or on your router/modem gives a lot of flexibility.
      DNS servers do not take up much in the way of ram or CPU on any computer built in the last 10 years.

      So yes APK you do have a point and a product. But no you are not telling the whole truth.

      Why am I arguing with APK? I know it is pointless.

  20. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    Other people can post photos of you and tag you in them. You can't easily stop them doing it... Their phone might even do it automatically. Even if you avoid doing anything embarrassing in public it's easy for photos to be taken out of context.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  21. Re:Use their tracking against them by retroworks · · Score: 1

    "Just fill out false information, post pictures that are not you, tag things incorrectly, feed the bots dust til they choke."

    This "camouflage" or "false positive" technique is way underutilized with cookie tracking and searches tracking.

    But it's far more difficult with facial recognition. If you are using someone else's face, it gets tricky, and is also probably fairly easy to sort out electronically.

    I've thought about using Photoshopping to slightly change the distance between my eyes, shrink or expand my chin, etc. But that's time consuming and socially awkward if Friends figure it out and wonder what the hell I'm doing.

    A late friend who was in the marijuana and drug importing business in the 1980s religiously changed his facial hair every 6 weeks. Full beard, goatee, mustache, clean shave, etc., constantly altering superficial grooming. I didn't realize why he did it until he told me how surprised I'd be at the number of people who were confused by it.

    --
    Gently reply
  22. Dear newly created sockpuppet account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take your own advice, get on topic, get remedial reading lessons, & above ALL else?

    Prove my points as listed as wrong (you can't & you know it, I know it, + so does anyone else reading).

    * You fail... especially with the 7 DIGIT sockpuppet account (which inferior competitor of mine are you? AdBlock being paid off by Google & others is a good candidate... that money would go a LONG WAYS to funding sockpuppetry like yours, now wouldn't it? Yes, it would!)

    APK

    P.S.=> Seriously, if THAT off-topic crap is the "best you've got"? You've got nothing... apk

  23. Trying to put words in my mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: That I never stated! Did I say hosts do wildcards? No.

    * Glad to see you agree with my points though... they are completely valid.

    APK

    P.S.=> A troll here said I don't "write well" -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... and IT'S FUNNY YOU UNDERSTOOD ME WELL ENOUGH, but apparently, you can't read well as I NEVER SAID "HOSTS DO WILDCARDS" for Pete's sake - that's an effete & ineffectual pure troll tactic I've seen before, MANY times (trying to put words in my mouth I never ONCE stated) along with "you can't write" bullshit I cited in the link above also... apk

    1. Re:Trying to put words in my mouth? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not putting words in your mouth. You wrote:

      Wasting CPU cycles, RAM memory, & other forms of I/O to do what a single file can do

      and that is factually wrong, because a DNS resolver does things that a hosts file can't do, particularly the one thing that the other AC asked about: wildcards. Your copypasta doesn't fit the topic of the discussion. There's a reason why everybody considers you batshit crazy, and it's not just your tell-tale style.

  24. Here's the facebook part of my /etc/hosts by ciaran2014 · · Score: 2

    Unhelpful people will point out that such a list isn't and can't be perfectly complete. That's true, but so what, this list blocks a ton of tracking. If I'm missing important domains, please tell me which ones. I've merged in the domains from Blaskowicz's list which weren't already in mine. (I've also heard conflicting opinions on using 127.0.0.1 vs 0.0.0.0. I don't know which is better but I do know the difference is insignificant.)

    0.0.0.0 apps.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 connect.facebook.net
    0.0.0.0 de-de.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 developers.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 error.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 es-es.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 facebook.net
    0.0.0.0 fb.com
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn-creative-a.akamaihd.net
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn.com
    0.0.0.0 fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net
    0.0.0.0 fbm.mysocialpixel.com
    0.0.0.0 fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net
    0.0.0.0 fr-fr.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 internet.org
    0.0.0.0 l.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 login.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 newsroom.fb.com
    0.0.0.0 nl-nl.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 pixel.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 s-static.ak.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 scontent-ams.xx.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 static.ak.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 static.ak.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 static.api.ak.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 threatexchange.fb.com
    0.0.0.0 upload.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.connect.facebook.net
    0.0.0.0 www.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.facebook.net
    0.0.0.0 www.fb.com
    0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.com
    0.0.0.0 www.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 www.login.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.connect.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 www.static.ak.fbcdn.net
    0.0.0.0 1-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 2-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 3-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 4-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 5-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 6-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 7-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 8-edge-chat.facebook.com
    0.0.0.0 9-edge-chat.facebook.com

    --
    Help build the anti-software-patent wiki
    1. Re:Here's the facebook part of my /etc/hosts by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      The advantage of using Privacy Badger is that it doesn't rely on a constantly maintained list. It looks at how domains are being used, if they are tracking you by pulling the same cookies on different sites, and if they offer anything useful. It then automatically blocks useless/invasive ones, all without any effort on your part.

      If you are too lazy to maintain a list or want your non technical friends and relatives to be safe, it's a good solution. Use both, they complement each other.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Here's the facebook part of my /etc/hosts by ciaran2014 · · Score: 1

      I use both, and AdblockPlus.

      What I like about Privacy Badger is that it comes from EFF and it's free software (gplv3).

      On the other hand, I don't know how good their algorithm is or how it distinguishes between good and bad content providers. For example, one massive privacy invasion is Google web services, but these are legitimately used by many websites, for images or javascript or fonts.

      I don't know how Privacy Badger views this type of service. They could have a hand-written rule for Google, but what about lesser known sites providing similar services?

      Then there's the issue of me having more stringent requirements than most. For example, another line in my /etc/hosts is:

      0.0.0.0 fonts.googleapis.com

      Seeing the web developer's chosen font is not important enough to justify google getting notified every time I visit a site.

      But Privacy Badger is definitely something that's "good enough" for me to be able to install it on a non-technical friend's computer. It's not perfect but I'd know I'd improved their situation.

      --
      Help build the anti-software-patent wiki
  25. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    Yet you fail to grasp the main divergence between corporate and political oversight: I cannot influence or chose so easily the policies by which I'm managed, while I have the simple option of just not using facebook and get on with my life without it. And even arguing you can switch countries, you will find some sort of policy you don't agree with anywhere you are on earth, and the aforementioned difficulty to influence them to your interest. Both their oversight powers, when limited in scope, are exactly the same, as Facebook can have whatever managerial decision they chose in their closed-source platform, and so can most of the EU in their law-standardizing scheme. That army argument is just proof of that, as it is not in EU's scope to manage that directly, while they can still do so indirectly if you look deep into communitary law.

  26. 0.0.0.0 = smaller + faster load & parse... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: It also incurs no loopback (if adapter installed) as 127.0.0.1 can PLUS per my subject, during the File Open/Read/Close I-O cycle, internal load + parse of hosts is faster (as well as the filemass being made up to 30% smaller as is the case for me here vs. 127.0.0.1 being larger & slower due to that filesize increase vs. the smaller/faster 0.0.0.0 blocking address).

    APK

    P.S.=> Put it THIS way: A CS grad @ MS, their VP of the "Windows Client Performance Division" even was FORCED TO CONCEDE THAT TO ME, directly here on /. (when I asked WHY they removed an even FASTER smaller on in a plain 0 blocking address, which still functions on 2000/XP/Server 2003 mind you yielding smaller + faster hosts files, which MS f'd up on 12/09/2008 "Patch Tuesday" & yet it was added post XP SP#2 since someone saw the efficiency value I am now extolling) -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... so, "proofs in the pudding" on that note, per what I just stated, + a REAL EXPERT (that had to give in to me no less) agreeing with me... argue with the results... apk

  27. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    You can actually preempt those photos from being related to your account (tagged with your profile). Other than that, it's just someone posting photos in the public domain, which is not prohibited under any platform as long as they aren't offensive, abusive, with content in the likes of nude children and whatnot. A paper can just publish photos of individuals, be them famous or just part of an article piece, without any impediment, well, because that is freedom of expression business as usual. The fact you didn't know you could preempt those tags (which I didn't either from the get go but learned), is much the same as learning you have to pay taxes for whatever you do commercially in a country. You just happen to be eased into it since your parents pay most of taxes related to you until you are much aware of them when starting adult life. Analogously, the moment you find more and more undesirable tags of you in facebook, is the moment you decide to look deep enough to find out you can actually preempt it. Same as taxes, you can be caught off-guard.

  28. DNS using more resources = right on my part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More programs, & parts, in DNS is using more resources - period...

    You are wrong, & again: I NEVER ONCE SAID hosts use wildcards... & THAT, is putting words in MY MOUTH I never once stated - period.

    * Are you trying to say that by loading a DNS server with all its added parts (and complexity since it's harder to write rules for in the first place vs. simple hosts entries) & faults in security is "better" & uses LESS CPU, RAM, & other forms of I/O?

    That'd be defying physics... period.

    CLUE: Using more I/O on all those levels ALONE guarantees more power usage, & CPU usage too (means more electrical power used & higher utility bills).

    APK

    P.S.=> Answer that question in bold above... apk

    1. Re:DNS using more resources = right on my part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you trying to say that by loading a DNS server with all its added parts & faults in security is "better" & uses LESS CPU, RAM, & other forms of I/O?

      ><(((('> Yes, it is better in the sense that, unlike hosts file entries, it does what I want it to do: block domains including all possible subdomains (and other things, like DNSSEC validation, but that's beside the point). It wastes fewer resources because using resources to do what I want to do is better than wasting them on something that I have no use for. I bought the CPU, RAM, etc. to use them for my purposes, not to let them sit idle or to use them ineffectively.

  29. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    The state also tracks non-citizens in a country, unemployed/inactive citizens, and even unemployed non-citizens abroad for whatever interests. Tracking is not just web 3.0, it's society/globalization 101. One learns to live with it. The EU wants to force a square peg on a round hole.

  30. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    Can't really see your point, but I would definitely call hypocrisy on non-racist clansmen. The EU, encompassing a capitalist state-group where internal corporate policy and business models are constantly regulated, arguing citizen protection, is just a more complex form of that same hypocrisy. Uber is the perfect example of the same concept being antithetically applied: "Oh wait, we have taxis, but we can't have non-associative taxis, even if that business is much more for the public-interest (and even pays taxes more assiduously due to high technological dependency!). Why you ask? Because Taxi associations are here for much longer, they have a cultural background (which has nothing to do with cultural history though), but well, they have a lot more political influence than this newcomer..."

  31. DNS = worse for exploits, resource use, & more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1st: You're driving added programs + more added data = more power & resources usage.

    2nd: DNSBL, ever heard of those? Hosts get you around that if you don't like that blocking of sites you like.

    3rd: DNS request logs, ever heard of those too?? Hosts get you around those also (they track you, & nobody likes being tracked like some tagged animal).

    4th: Downed DNS, happens a lot - hosts get you past those easily since you never reference them, & for your favorite sites @ the TOP of a custom hosts file, you exceed remote DNS lookups & their indexing speeds since you do your resolving LOCALLY (faster by far) & for where you spend MOST of your time online (for me, it's like 95% per my browser histories & router logs information I used).

    5th: Redirect poisoned DNS - 99.999% of ISP dns servers are NOT PATCHED vs. it (Kaminsky flaw) - hosts get you around THAT RISK too!

    6th: A 'small sampling' of DNS exploits over time to recently to "seal the deal" on you as to DNS being 'better' (more exploitable by far & uses more resources + adds complexity) - in my addendum to this post (/. limits how much I can post, & I do have TONS of evidences thereof).

    By comparison, My hosts file program PROTECTS hosts vs. exploit in MANY ways, 1st locking it with Read-Only protection every 1/2 second on a hi-res timer IF the program is left resident (which gets updates every 12 hours periodically & writes the NEW hosts for users "automagically" & thus, even IF a malware could blow past my protection AND UAC + WFP? I write the NEW hosts from a pristine backup, NOT THE ORIGINAL potentially exploited hosts file - thus, no way to harm it, it always gets updated NEW that way).

    APK

    P.S.=> Sorry, but 'clue': You fail - on all accounts noted & by driving added programs AND data for a local DNS (especially on a separate machine) you DO use more power, & other resources by adding more moving parts & complexity... apk

  32. New plug in by goombah99 · · Score: 2

    I use the "strangers on a train" plug in. It exchanges all your facebook cookies every 5 minutes with another random person. It doesn't hurt your facebook login itself since you still need your password for that. It just scrambles your identity when you press like. If everyone used this then the "likes" would still add up to being meaningful but the user profiles would be completely homogenized and have no tracking value.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:New plug in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use this too and the cool thing is it usually lets you like the same thing multiple times since your identity keeps rotating each time you hit the like button

  33. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

    I have the simple option of just not using facebook and get on with my life without it.

    No, you don't. That's the point. These organisations built around tracking and data mining are collecting data about you from sources you can't control. Notably, they systematically try to collect information about individuals via for example each individual's friends, without any consent or potentially even knowledge of the data subject.

    A feature as simple as having a mobile app that uploads the phonebook to FB gives them a name and number and a link from that shadow account to the phone's owner. All it takes is a few different people installing that app and their mutual friend is associated with all of their accounts, allowing data mining organisations to draw all kinds of probably correct inferences.

    And that's just using a single method of data collection via a third party, without any sort of correlation with other data sets, and within a single organisation that at least has a commercial interest in keeping that data very secure and only using it internally. Nothing about your argument guarantees any such favourable conditions, though.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  34. Addendum #1/3: Partial list of DNS exploits... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.dshield.org/diary/N...

    http://www.dshield.org/diary/A...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/...

    http://www.dshield.org/diary/M...

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

    http://www.scmagazineus.com/ne...

    http://www.dshield.org/diary/S...

    https://threatpost.com/en_us/b...

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    http://it.slashdot.org/story/1...

    * "Read 'em & weep" more are coming... & that's only SOME of the exploits DNS has experienced, I don't have them all but those will do!

    (Simply facts supporting my former post as I promised in it, to show the RAMPANT EXPLOITABILITY of DNS vs. my program AND WINDOWS protecting hosts perfectly...)

    APK

    P.S.=> You can't win, accept it... apk

  35. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tracking is not just web 3.0, it's society/globalization 101. One learns to live with it.

    Or, like civilised people, we decide that some behaviour is potentially damaging and/or socially unacceptable, we make it illegal, and we punish those who continue to do it.

    Also, your continued analogy between what governments do and what private businesses do is silly. Technology is not inherently evil. Storing data about someone is not inherently evil. How you use that technology and what you use that data for may be evil, or may not.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  36. Addendum #2/3: Partial list of DNS exploits... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  37. Addendum #3/3: Partial list of DNS exploits... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  38. Fact: You can't validly dispute my points... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All I see from you is double-talk b.s. trolling trying to further your agenda.

    LOL, above ALL else?

    You fools don't think I use DNS??

    I do!

    Sparingly though (sub 4% of the time) & a remote one (not eating up power here locally setting up a DNS server with more moving parts & flaws galore I've shown, see below OR even as another moving part program that eats up more resources & is more complex + prone to issues YOU EVEN CONCEDE NOW, lol... unbelievable!)

    I use OpenDNS (they are PATCHED vs. Kaminsky flaws, & 99.999% of ISP DNS' aren't mind you) AND THEY FILTER vs. THREATS TOO, supplementing hosts I use (though I avoid DNS remotely 95%++ of the time due to hardcoded favs in my hosts @ THE TOP OF IT to exceed index speeds of DNS remotely especially) IF I miss a lookup in hosts (most of which are blocked except for my favs @ the top since they're ads or botnets & maliciously coded sites I never INTEND to get to since they're blocked for that reason).

    PLUS - THAT all happens in RAM here no less, fast as possible, & PURE KERNELMODE (I use the IP stack + diskcache kernelmode subsystems to do so, no context-switch overheads OR breakdown due to a large hosts file I use as is the case with the local dns cache usermode slower client service in Windows).

    APK

    P.S.=> I've just completely 'wiped out' another 'naysayer' in this exchange here -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... & YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO PROVE ME WRONG (but then again, you've already SHOWN us all YOU CAN'T, period, validly vs. facts I've put out in favor of hosts over DNS alone)... apk

  39. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then please tell me how i can preemt pictures of me getting tagged on facebook as a non facebook user. Also please note that the privacy laws in the EU do not recognize what you call "public domain," much less if the pictures were taken in a non-public place an uploaded by a facebook member.

  40. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    I do not disagree with you in your last 3 sentences. Other than that, I accept the fact that my social condition (that of a working, middle-class citizen, i.e. one vote) simply does not allow me to have that influence in communitary law-making. Democracy allows me this vote every now and then, on a political array of partisan packages I will never entirely agree with. I cope with it yet express my desire to have means to control it in web comments, petitions, but not much else. Civilized people cope. Activists "decide that some behaviour is potentially damaging and/or socially unacceptable", unilaterally. Governments turn actual decisions into law for us in an pseudo-technocratic kind of way, where we, for whatever it may matter, deem (through our vote) the government has the necessary knowledge background in order to make the right decisions, through their elected status. Well, that is the main basis for my comparison of state vs corporations right there: they both have assumed knowledge to act upon the things they are entitled rights to act upon. One just acts upon legislation, the other acts on the development, availability, usage and monetization of their intellectual property.

  41. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    You always have a choice. Don't supply your phone number to people you know, think or have the risk of making that information public to parties you don't want to interact with. You only lose control when you forfeit that control to another party. It effectively is out of your hands by opting-in, even if unconsciously. That is ignorance. What you can't allow is a bureaucratization spree from entities that they themselves have forfeit their bureaucratization rights by establishing market liberalization. You are either all-in in capitalism, or you aren't, much like communism. Any argument that attempts to say otherwise is moot.

  42. I love destroying you ac trolls... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Validly disprove any points I made on a technical level (you can't clearly): That does it for me easily right there alone.

    Thanks for "projecting" I'm a "genius" (actually 135 IQ on most tests I've taken so you're wrong again as usual) - I can "get the job done" in the art & science of computing (professionally on the job since 1994 + yes, in shareware/freeware - have you done so? NO?? Didn't think so - of course, you're FREE to prove otherwise... but you can't even *IF* you could, why?? I've never seen a ware written by "Anonymous Coward" like you, lol!).

    Low quality cruft? Hmmm, from the results here, nobody can prove me wrong (probably competitor sockpuppets, since AdBlock's been paid off large by GOOGLE to NOT DO ITS JOB, the only 1 it had mind you (lol), so that money goes a LONG WAYS to paying for sockpuppetry & trolling... too bad all that can't stand up to facts I put out, eh?).

    You're welcome to write a more versatile & useful program that yields better speed, security, reliability, + even anonymity (to an extent) yet somehow, I suspect that is way, Way, WAY BEYOND your limited 'skillset'... especially since you're not even a GOOD troll!

    I've also had my code be bought out by certified MS partners & it went to a FINALIST position @ MS TechEd in its HARDEST CATEGORY: SQLServer Performance Enhancement, 2 yrs. in a ROW no less... have YOU done that? No.

    APK

    P. S.=> The ONLY THING that got "left behind" is you, as I handed YOU YOUR BEHIND via facts I utilized that you can't disprove validly all thru this exchange - especially here -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... that shut you the F up, easily... lol! apk

  43. Time to tear you apart point by point... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People here != MOST people & most have routers with limited RAM (you can't populate them with LARGE deny rules tables, stupid).

    Windows' USERMODE SLOWER (important) dns clientside cache BREAKS DOWN on larger hosts files - & what is the point of having one that's not populated as well as it can be? NONE - my app, however, does that job for you from 10 reputable & reliable sources for custom hosts data (automatically IF you like)... @ least Linux's doesn't (I'll give it that).

    DNS Lookups for me are LITERALLY sub 4% of the time & I put where I spend 95%++ of my time into hosts @ THE TOP OF IT so I exceed DNS cache index speed 95%++ of the time, stupid... the rest, *IF* I miss a lookup? Goes out to a REMOTE DNS (OpenDNS, filtered vs. threats also, & patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw where by comparison 99.999% of ISP dns' are NOT!). This also occurs in PURE KERNELMODE no context-switch to usermode (faulty windows limited dns cache service which breaks on larger hosts files) via TCP/IP itself & the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem, IN RAM... fast as it gets.

    Running your OWN DNS (especially on a separate machine) eats more power, & cpu/ram/other forms of I-O resources & thus IS MORE INEFFICIENT (& more complex, since writing DNS rules tables is FAR MORE COMPLEX than simple hosts entries).

    I merely use what you ALREADY natively have, with no added moving parts for added overheads, exploits galore in DNS, and complexity. You on the other hand, do make those mistakes, dolt...

    APK

    P.S.=> It has been a REAL PLEASURE tearing a dolt like you up, since you're proving you're unable to *THINK* for yourself, & merely spit-back what those selling you inferior security faulty inefficient tools like a DNS server told you... disprove the above, good luck: You NEED it (more like a miracle dolt)... apk

    1. Re:Time to tear you apart point by point... apk by matfud · · Score: 1

      You have to love APK. Somehow he missed the point. Somewhere in 1980 or so? I could be wrong. Perhaps it was earlier.

      Modifying the hosts file is useful but it is not a solution to all issues. Faster, Stronger, more secure! Well no, not really.

    2. Re:Time to tear you apart point by point... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your mistake's assuming all routers are highend ones with RAM enough to do as many block deny entries as hosts can. You're wrong and that is that. High end routers from say, CISCO, cost BIG bucks brand new (even used).

      Also, the more RAM they have to charge onboard to do those deny blocklists in routers? The more power they use. Period.

      Hosts are native to your system. It's not "adding on more". High end routers are. A lot more in terms of cost that's certain.

      APK

      P.S.=> Accept it: You FAILED & "face the music" here in my completely FAIR CHALLENGE TO YOU -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... since the "best you've got" is that b.s. you've spouted here twice... apk

    3. Re:Time to tear you apart point by point... apk by matfud · · Score: 1

      That is the APK we all know and love.

  44. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    Then please tell me how i can preemt pictures of me getting tagged on facebook as a non facebook user.

    You do a google instead of using this comment section. If you don't have an account, it only links to a name, which is an ambiguous thing. If it uniquely links to your identity by usage of, e.g. a social security number, you can sue. But stop thinking you can preempt people from being people discriminating the platform. You can't prevent your children being bullied - you can only switch their school. Example below:

    https://www.facebook.com/help/community/question/?id=10152050760878003

    Also please note that the privacy laws in the EU do not recognize what you call "public domain," much less if the pictures were taken in a non-public place an uploaded by a facebook member.

    If the place happens to be your place, or show any item, artwork or intellectual property under any form that is yours or from your employer, you can also DMCA' it out of facebook. If it only shows your face, well, that depends on your state policy of who owns the right of your face on a picture. In the EU you most likely can use anyone's face as long as it is not unfair use that places you under some legal harm. Not much else though. The bullying argument comes to mind once again...

  45. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Halo1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I do not disagree with you in your last 3 sentences. Other than that, I accept the fact that my social condition (that of a working, middle-class citizen, i.e. one vote) simply does not allow me to have that influence in communitary law-making.

    As a 25 year old PhD student, together with a bunch of like-minded people that had no political clout or connections (many of which were students or PhD students), I managed to help block the EU software patents directive back in 2009. This directive had the full support of the European Commission, and initially also of the majority of the largest groups in the European Parliament (the Christian Democrats and the Socialists). Big IT companies (IBM, Microsoft, Nokia, ...) spent over 4 million euro on lobbying. And yet in the end (after 7 years of procedure) they all decided to go for cancelling the directive rather than risking it might get amended do something we may like and they might not.

    For me, it started in a very silly way: I sent a mail to all Belgian MEPs, explaining them my view on the directive and on software patents. A week later, I got a call from an assistant of a number of MEPs telling me it was the first mail on the topic that made any sense to her, and asking me (a random student that just mailed them) how they should vote on the report that was being tabled the next week. I kind of panicked, told her I'd get back to her, looked on the Internet who could help me with that, ended up at the FFII and the rest is history.

    Seriously, politicians and their aides are also also just people, and if you say something that makes sense, many of them will pay attention. There are of course always those who have made up their mind and won't care, but in my experience of 5 years of talking with them, I did not come to the conclusion that it's the majority of them. Not even close. Especially at the European level, where they are often happy that finally someone from the home country actually cares about what they're doing (as long as you're not sending template mails).

    And yes, in the end it did cost lot of effort. But it is patently (hah!) false that there is nothing you can do influence or achieve at the EU level.

    Democracy allows me this vote every now and then

    That is just one part of democracy. It's an important one, but still just a part. A functional democracy requires way more effort than just voting every couple of years. And you can do it just as well as anyone else.

    --
    Donate free food here
  46. NoNonAlphaCharsHere: A prediction... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a look @ my replies here disproving my naysayers, judge for yourself who "came out ontop" (me, no questions asked, on MANY levels in efficiency, & more)... now, they're "doing their USUAL 'trolling'" of me, calling me names etc. (which I did back AFTER they did me, after all, "when in rome, do as the romans do & speak in a language they understand", lol... they had it coming ONTOP of my handing them their asses on every single 'so-called point' of theirs I shot to pieces on DNS inefficiency in RAM/CPU/Other forms of I-O issues vs. hosts AND dns security issues galore, all cited from reputable sources over time).

    PREDICTION: From experience, the unjustifiable 'downmods' will happen to most of, if not all, of my posts (so they can effetely & vainly attempt to 'hide' them + their getting their asses handed to them by "yours truly" @ every single turn).

    APK

    P.S.=> They're already attempting "forums sliding" with a load of bullshit posts & trolling me to "hide" my posts too, weak... most here read WELL below the easily cheated by sockpuppets so-called 'moderation systems' default 0 bottom threshold & everyone sees my posts anyhow... man, I tell you 1 thing:

    I LOVE OUTWITTING MENIAL DIMWITS THAT CAN'T THINK FOR THEMSELVES (especially 'network techies/admins', the failures in the comp. sci. field that couldn't "cut it" as programmers, the HIGHEST LEVEL of this field, since we invent the tools those menials MERELY USE, nothing more... lol!)

    They make ME, look GOOD, & themselves by way of comparison? WELL, lol "not so good", especially with reprehensible tactics noted above AND failing to me on every 'point' of theirs I knocked them on their asses with easily (since they're undereducated dolts & simpleton failures in the art & science of computing that cannot think for themselves & merely spit back what vendor salesmen tell them since those salesmen realize they're dealing with MENIALS, not truly CS educated people)... apk

    1. Re:NoNonAlphaCharsHere: A prediction... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      @APK gr8 b8 m8 but => it's 2 l8 & 2 much h8. /*
          NB mandatory multiline comment with a single line.
      */

  47. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

    The trouble with this argument is that even if you are the most well-informed and capable geek on Earth, many of your friends and family won't be. The only way to keep control by your argument is effectively to completely cut yourself off from normal society and live as a hermit.

    There is a reason we have laws (and, often, constitutions) protecting basic human rights and freedoms. We also have laws about consumer rights, and data protection, and regulation of critical industries, and fair contract terms. These protections exist precisely because you should not be forced to give up some things just to live a normal life, and no relatively powerful organisation (including, often, your own government) should be able to compel you to do so.

    I don't understand the final point you are trying to make, where you talk about being all-in. You certainly can have an underlying capitalist economic model but with regulations or other adjustments on top to create additional incentives. Most first world nations do.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  48. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    It's very nice to hear the system worked for you. But you have to accept that the whole environment lined up for a favorable conclusion. At quick glance I identify: you were not alone, as you ganged up a scientific group with relevant background on the matter at hand (even if students); you admittedly wasted a lot of effort for a single measure in your professional area; you are also Belgium-based, which does have an influence, be it by language barriers, or the simple fact that if a member of EU counsel needed an in-person technical assertion, it would be much easier to just holler a local.

    And in my defense, I didn't say there was nothing we could do to influence such decisions - I said it was difficult. Again, your own argument assumes that difficulty. I'll give you my example: I'm a 26yo CS Researcher based in Portugal, and I vape. I have no background on vape research except articles I read for personal development, which tell me vaping is so much better than smoking. I did what I could, and what I knew was relevant for EU anti-vaping directives to not go ahead - I signed petitions that nobody cared about. The measures went ahead, and my country happened to be the first to ratify that directive last friday, under guise of tobacco product legislation. I time-shifted the entire Assembly of the Republic session to see what would happen. Portuguese people don't have much say on EU down streamed, government sanctioned projects of law, and even the represented parties have low to no opinion on it. The entire discussion point was a farce, focusing on the point of tobacco packaging imagery and completely disregarding the full scale of measures in that law bundle. It was approved unanimously. Nobody cared but the 100 vapers of my country who I predicted watched the plenary. What could I have done more? Switch my career to vape research maybe? I don't have that kind of motivation. I'd rather be arrested for buying vape products online (which is now prohibited here) than waste my life for another line of work. We also now pay 60 cents per ml of e-liquid bought nationally. And that wasn't even part of the EU directive: it was part of the annual government budget - a much larger package made into law which was highly influenced by the troika of lenders to my bankrupt country.

    I'm not saying we are not to act. I am stating there are people for that. Elected officials are supposed to be those people, or the ones who connect the relevant parties so they can provide appropriate input (your specific case). But I know, for a fact, there are things worth investing your time, and others you might as well live with them. The privacy rights I lose to a US based company called Facebook are not one of them.

  49. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    Erratum: In that last sentence, I meant "not one of the former", i.e. worth investing my time, as I deal with it easily with methods Facebook itself provides..

  50. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's not the EU who is trying to stop Facebook but a Belgian Privacy Protection Commission. This commission is founded in popular demand to protect the privacy of Belgian citizens and to be a service point were citizens can report privacy issues. There were many complains about this issue with Facebook and the commission tries to defend the rights of those people. They have been successful to stop privacy invading ideas of the Belgian or local governments in the past (like the removal of public camera's) and are not controlled by the government or political parties or companies (although we can never be sure of course). This time they ga after Facebook's tracking technology of non Facebook users.

    The only thing it has to do with the EU is that if Facebook loses the case, privacy organisations in other EU member states can do the same and stop Facebook from creating shadow profiles.
     
    The EU has no say in this, expect when maybe member states agree for one privacy law in the entire EU.

  51. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by Halo1 · · Score: 1

    It's very nice to hear the system worked for you.

    There is no external "system" system entity that works or does not work for us. We are all part of what I what would rather call "democratic society". It's true that there are entities with lots of money and influence, but "regular people" tend to severely underestimate their ability to achieve anything. We won for a large part because we were not cynical enough to "know" that we could not win anyway.

    But you have to accept that the whole environment lined up for a favorable conclusion. At quick glance I identify: you were not alone, as you ganged up a scientific group with relevant background on the matter at hand (even if students);

    You are never alone. Of course you have to find like-minded people. But as my simple email demonstrates, even an action by one person can achieve a lot (it doesn't mean that it always does), of course).

    you admittedly wasted a lot of effort for a single measure in your professional area;

    I did not waste anything, it was a very enlightening and educational experience, that went way beyond my professional area (both in terms of experience and in terms of effect).

    you are also Belgium-based, which does have an influence, be it by language barriers, or the simple fact that if a member of EU counsel needed an in-person technical assertion, it would be much easier to just holler a local.

    We were maybe 4 Belgians in a core group of about 50 people. We were from all over the EU, including from Portugal.

    And in my defense, I didn't say there was nothing we could do to influence such decisions - I said it was difficult.

    You said that your condition "simply does not allow me to have that influence in communitary law-making". That is what triggered my reaction, because I know from experience it's not true.

    Again, your own argument assumes that difficulty. I'll give you my example: I'm a 26yo CS Researcher based in Portugal, and I vape. I have no background on vape research except articles I read for personal development, which tell me vaping is so much better than smoking. I did what I could, and what I knew was relevant for EU anti-vaping directives to not go ahead - I signed petitions that nobody cared about.

    Petitions can help, but only if accompanied by "real action": starting actual discussions with MEPs by mailing them, setting up websites collecting information and presenting it in a clear form, analysing amendments etc. Those petitions can then be used to attract attention to the "meat" that you have to offer. Note that personally, I have no real opinion on vaping, since I'm a smoker nor a vaper (I do wonder what the long term effects are of inhaling liters of formaldehyde though).

    I'm not saying we are not to act. I am stating there are people for that. Elected officials are supposed to be those people, or the ones who connect the relevant parties so they can provide appropriate input (your specific case).

    And the people *those people* get their input from. Getting elected does not make you all-knowing. Being an advisor, or group of advisers, to a politician doesn't either. It is part of our democratic duty to help inform those that have been elected ("duty" in the sense that if you don't do it, democracy doesn't work). While in part this is done by unions, NGOs, lobbyists etc, individuals also have an import part to play here.

    But I know, for a fact, there are things worth investing your time, and others you might as well live with them. The privacy rights I lose to a US based company called Facebook are not one of them.

    Maybe you don't mind, but the erosion of privacy rights is definitely harmful to society as a whole. Even if only because if companies are allowed to get away with it, then the extremists in the "intelligence commun

    --
    Donate free food here
  52. Re:I'm European and I don't care. EU is hypocritic by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    You don't have to be an ermit and you still have a choice. I leave my work phone off when I'm off work. I silence my family phone while I'm at work. I chose to do that. I opt-in and provide my contact information (work or family's) disregarding the consequences, because I'm aware the consequences aren't as bad as the EU wants to paint them. You don't need to have 2 numbers, you need to have full awareness of what your single number is subject to. Then again I don't do anything wrong so I'm not afraid of mass-collection of data, but nobody should. What they should be afraid of is two things: that this data is not used anonymously, for statistical purposes (and that is where the EU should step in, regulating such usage); and that my freedom, or an organization's freedom to use data in an anonymous fashion, for their statistical purposes, with the data's source having opted-in for (or not opted-out against) it is just as important as my freedom to do my things privately. The measures the EU always wants to undertake involve preventing companies from asking users that right - for god's sake it's not like they are soliciting for sex! You give your number to your electrical company, you water company, your cable provider, and yet I don't see you pointing out that they use that number for marketing purposes constantly, repeatedly, unceasingly against your will. They will cold call you to death, yet you are afraid facebook will somehow become this off-shore big brother you are just too attached to willingly drop, like some overpowered form of cocaine which is just as addictive but 10 times worse for your health and 100 times more illegal. I'll give you the perfect example of a state that is much more afraid of facebook than the EU: Brazil. Brazil is one of the most corrupt states in the world, and the "citizen privacy protection" argument they used to move facebook's servers to their geographical domain is the biggest scam any politician could pull off. There is no people protection, there is only systematic corruption protection on that measure, or even worse - they want to have access to that privacy infringing data so they just force it out of HTTPS through the (then) feasible physical MITM hacks, and the corruption machine spins faster. The all-in argument was meant at the market scope of things, and no, I'm not saying some social policies such as universal health care are morally wrong, but they are morally unfeasible in a perfect capitalist state, much like meritocracy is unfeasible in a perfect communist state. And that is why markets crash.

  53. UBlock = inferior: Ask yourself these questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can UBlock or ABP/Edge do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads: See 2-10 next)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communication to C&C servers
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phishing
    10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on ANY webbound app (think stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
    16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each above on AdBlock variants doing it as well or at all!

    APK

    P.S.=> UBlock does FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison, do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    UBlock adds complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    For the BEST hosts file?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    ... ap

  54. Your other suggestions' disadvantages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maintaining hosts = "automagic GUI easy" via my program APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit here

    AND

    See subject & this link -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... as to UBlock's inferiority vs. hosts on MANY levels, since hosts do FAR MORE than "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" ever could & far more efficiently as well, by many orders of magnitude in favor of hosts (or ANY AdBlock variant for that matter that is a browser extension that's EASILY NATIVELY DETECTED by websites & turned against them by native browser methods).

    APK

    P.S.=> Granted, I've never *tried* privacy badger, but then again? I don't NEED to - I wrote my own solution, using what you already have in KERNELMODE faster more efficient operation than incurring browser overheads in slower usermode + layering on slowing browsers more with added messagepassing, & mine just plain "knocks the SNOT outta the competition" with a native part you ALREADY HAVE (even DNS on many levels & it's the closest in terms of abilities, but not in terms of exploits on it that are possible OR in efficiency if locally setup, a stupid needless extra complex thing to do vs. hosts)... apk

  55. Make hosts mgt.GUI easy... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Plus, make your lists far more current & comprehensive from 10 sources in the security community itself that produce current, reliable, & VERIFIED data for custom host files, via APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    * :)

    APK

    P.S.=> MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    ... apk

  56. Easy GUI deduplication of hosts? No problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit SR-2 http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    * I set it up so you can take EXISTING hosts files & merge them into the current updated & verified custom hosts file data it imports VERY easily!

    (Additionally, as to NEW data to merge? ONLY as you see fit, & from which of the 10 reputable & reliable sources in the security community it uses, if you choose to NOT use them all - personally, I do, as they update only which makes for smaller downloads that process faster & merge quicker with your already existing hosts file data, which it SOUNDS like you have).

    APK

    P.S.=> Heck, I *know* you have hosts already - you're one of the folks I cite as being a hosts file user here on /. when I have to (when forced to shove trolls back into their holes with verifiable proofs)... apk

  57. AdBlockPlus = Inferior + 'Souled-Out'... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    FREE & adds speed, security, + reliability, doing more with less, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' redirect security issues:

    ---

    A.) Hosts do more than:

    1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/... )
    2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
    3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).

    C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity

    D.) Hosts files yield more:

    1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
    2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
    3.) Reliability (vs. downed, Kaminsky redirected (99% ISP DNS' = unpatched vs. it), DGA, Fastflux, & dynDNS botnets)
    4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).

    ---

    * Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.

    * Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    (Instead, work w/ a more capable native kernelmode part you already have - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack))

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"

    ...apk

  58. The easiest simplest way = Hosts... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit: http://start64.com/index.php?o... by using what you ALREADY NATIVELY HAVE (a hosts file).

    * It makes hosts file mgt. a "GUI EASY SNAP" getting its custom hosts file data vs. threats online from 10 reputable sources in the security community...

    (Easier by FAR than using regular expressions in "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" & its variants OR doing DNS rules 'deny' tables)

    APK

    P.S.=> It doesn't get *ANY* easier or simpler than hosts files, or more efficient (since it uses what you already have), for the purposes here & vs. other threats online (& hosts add more speed, security, reliability, + even anonymity than ANY other single solution, far more efficiently & easily):

    In fact, MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    ... apk

  59. Go download Privacy Badger from the EFF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a great program that blocks facebook and other malicious sites (or at least the malicious parts of the sites which track you).

  60. Re:Addendum #1/3: Partial list of DNS exploits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Serious question, Are you ChrisChan?

  61. Serious answer (since he's gone silent)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: I handed him his ASS, easily, destroying him point-by-point vs. his "so-called 'points'" that these MENIAL network techie/admin failures in the art & science of computing (merely users with a better password, nothing more, only able to 'spit back' what salesmen vendors KNOW they can fool their dumb asses with) effetely *try* on me, repeatedly, only to have me OUTPLAY them in this game of chess, every SINGLE time they try me... lol!

    (It's always the same damn result, & you'd think these dolts would stop already, but, alas, they must be sado-masochists apparently, & LOVE to take a beating from me, as I adminster it to them with documented concrete, verifiable, & undeniable fact from reputable sources as I have to SO many troll 'naysayers' here, it's not even funny anymore...)

    * :)

    APK

    P.S.=> By this point, well... you just KNOW that I've just GOTTA say it, as always, & in my own "inimitable style" as usual, now don't you? Ah, but of course you all do:

    THIS? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'", lol, as it ALWAYS IS, vs. puny network techie menial mindless /. trolls... apk

    1. Re:Serious answer (since he's gone silent)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Encore!

  62. Naw, he's had enough: Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject/nuff said -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    * :)

    ("And silence reigned in heaven for about the space of an hour".... his silence IS truly Golden!)

    APK

    P.S.=> "And the world wondered after the beast saying 'who is like unto the beast, and who can make war with him'?" Well, 1 thing's ABSOLUTELY certain - none of these undereducated wannabe network techie/admin losers in comp. sci. that couldn't cut it as coders can't, lol... they're just USERS WITH A BETTER PASSWORD, minus coders like myself, who create the tools THEY MERELY USE... they've proven once again, as per their limited usual, they can't THINK for themselves (which is why I blast them a new asshole every single time they try me)... apk

  63. Schneller solution! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arrest this schmutzige jude Zuckerberg and deport him to Auschwitz where wir will gas and incinerate his untermensch ass! Ach! Wir Europeisches Aryans are so clever!

  64. Hosts do all that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Easier records format vs. dns lists + more efficiently too, which you don't deny on any account noted).

    * Hosts do that with LESS moving parts as well with no need to "bolt-on" more by using what you already natively have in KERNELMODE (vs. usermode slowness/less cpu servicing).

    Lastly: By using my program to create them you get the most comprehensive & current custom hosts file data from 10 reputable reliable sources in the security community who produce it as VERIFIED data and the program keeps hosts extra safe (above & beyond WFP + UAC which Windows protects it with) so the data cannot be corrupted by malware AND creates new hosts files from a pristine backup as well...

    * "A fool makes things bigger + more complex: It takes a touch of genius & a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." - Einstein

    ** "Less is more" = GOOD engineering!

    APK

    P.S.=> For the BEST hosts file?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    ... apk

  65. Validly disprove these points then... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can adblock & its variants do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites/servers (beyond malicious ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets + stop communique to C&C servers
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (adds reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. bandwidth caps
    11.) Get you past a dnsbl
    12.) Keep you off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up websurfing by adblocks & hardcoded fav. sites
    14.) Work on ANY webbound app (like stand-alone email programs) multiplatform.
    15.) Give you easily texteditor controlled data for the above
    16.) Do all that & block ads (better than addons) more efficiently in cpu cycles + memory usage

    * ANSWER ="NO" to each above on AdBlock or its forked variants doing it as well or at all!

    APK

    P.S.=> AdBlock &/or it's forked variants do FAR less than hosts do & FAR less efficiently - hosts by way of comparison do MORE w/ less + Hosts start w/ the IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to operate (as 1st resolver queried):

    AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU usage flooring inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... + ClarityRay defeats it + it 'souled-out' & is crippled by default paid off to not do its job http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... & ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

    AdBlock & its variants add complexity/room for breakdown/exploit + from a slower mode of operations (usermode = more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode).

    For the BEST hosts file?

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-2 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    MalwareBytes' hpHosts Admin (MalwareBytes employee) hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Downl... & MalwareBytes = BEST antivirus http://www.av-test.org/en/news...

    ... apk

  66. It IS great & NEVER too late... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Never too late for me to crush these puny trolls (who are typically 1 of 5 types of people vainly scrabbing & failing @ "getting the better of me" - they can't, or they would've LONG ago):

    1.) Advertisers
    2.) malware makers &/or botnet herders
    3.) webmasters (I held the app back for them in fact, it was done, in 3 parts though in tty mode, as far back as 2003 here but when malvertizing went out of control, out the door she went to 'the masses' for the absolute good, since any idiot knows being destructive = easy, but doing good NEVER is, but it's worth it imo)
    4.) An INFERIOR competitor (e.g. - AdBlock, Ghostery, & RequestPolicy)

    * Doesn't 'take a brain' to realize THAT much - after all: THEY'RE THE ONES WHO GET "HURT" by it... problem is, per my other post to you? THEY have been hurting others bandwidth/speed, security, & more for DECADES...

    They certainly CAN'T get the better of me by validly disproving my points on hosts files' mulitiple nigh ubiquitous value to end users...

    Yes, that "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" payoff from Google goes a LONG WAYS to sockpuppeting trolls, now doesn't it? Too bad it can't prove ME or truths/facts I use, wrong eh? Not.

    APK

    P.S.=> In fact? I'd almost WAGER per #4 above in this case, that it's Wladimir Palant (AdBlock creator OR others forking off his code, inventing NOTHING THEMSELVES & the base is weak vs. hosts in its foundations to start with - or haven't I already PROVEN that with nobody being able to valid prove my points on hosts superiority to addons wrong? Yes, I have, look @ the results) who wrote me by email, 1st, saying "hosts are a shitty solution" - well, when I confonted him in email reply to show me that "Almost ALL ADS BLOCKED" can do MORE than custom hosts? He refused to reply, & RAN like a scared rabbit - ESPECIALLY after this article study showed how massively INEFFICIENT in RAM (5gb usage) & HIGH CPU USAGE AdBlock is https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ... apk

  67. law breakers should get punished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the company is acting in violation of European law"

    Uhm. So doesn't that mean people go to jail? I sure as hell go to jail when I break the law. Why don't Facebook executives who are knowingly breaking the law go to jail?

    Oh right. That 1% of the population that has a completely set of different rules from the rest of us. Silly me. I forgot about that.

  68. It's only the truth & fact... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most folks = LIMITED by the tech (routers w/ insufficient RAM) http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    APK

    P.S.=> That's how it is: For folks, again, w/ a "high-end" one, say CISCO, will have 128mb++ (& up possibly) to stuff entire blocklists into them that way & can "pull it off" though (only bummer is, those things DO cost a LOT)... apk