Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Begins Tracking Non-Users Around the Internet (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the no-escape dept.

Amar Toor, reporting for The Verge: Facebook will now display ads to web users who are not members of its social network, the company announced Thursday, in a bid to significantly expand its online ad network. As The Wall Street Journal reports, Facebook will use cookies, "like" buttons, and other plug-ins embedded on third-party sites to track members and non-members alike (Editor's note: link swapped with a non-paywall source). The company says it will be able to better target non-Facebook users and serve relevant ads to them, though its practices have come under criticism from regulators in Europe over privacy concerns. Facebook began displaying a banner notification at the top of its News Feed for users in Europe today, alerting them to its use of cookies as mandated under an EU directive.Mark Wilson of BetaNews adds that Facebook has outlined these changes in its cookies policy page. As part of which, the company is now allowing Facebook users to opt-out of the ad scheme by making changes to their Facebook settings. For users that don't have a Facebook account, they can opt-out through Digital Advertising Alliance in the United States and Canada, and the European Interactive Digital Adverting Alliance in Europe.

124 comments

  1. "Begins?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As anyone who's used RequestPolicy, NoScript or uBlock could tell you: any page with a Facebook like button is a tracker. Why, we even had an article about this... six years ago.

    1. Re:"Begins?" by bhcompy · · Score: 2

      And NoScript takes care of this problem pretty well.

    2. Re:"Begins?" by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 2

      Agreed that this isn't new, more like describing another star system taken over by the Empire...
      The more you tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

      Unfortunately, we don't have any Jedi to get us out of this one.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    3. Re:"Begins?" by Dins · · Score: 3, Informative

      I recently blocked the domain facebook.com in my hosts file. Noscript, uBlock, and Privacy Badger are likely more useful, but it sure felt good to do.

    4. Re: "Begins?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't forget their content delivery network

    5. Re:"Begins?" by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2

      "Begins" should be read as "now admits it is"

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    6. Re:"Begins?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, we don't have any Jedi to get us out of this one.

      Use ublock/noscript, Luke!

    7. Re: "Begins?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Theyll just move that to aikamai like m$ did.

  2. Digital Advertising Alliance by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

    http://www.aboutads.info/ is the domain I found for Digital Advertising Alliance. Can anyone confirm?

    1. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by msmash · · Score: 1

      It is for the United States. I have added the links to the story, please have a look. Thanks.

    2. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Don't bother, it's a trap. The "opt out" works by setting a cookie on your computer. If you care at all about stopping tracking, you already block such cookies anyway.

      Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin are much, much more effective. Since they can't offer a way to opt in, the nuke-it-from-orbit option is the only one left.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      I've always had 3rd-party cookies disabled anyway, so even if I wanted I couldn't use their "service".

    4. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      I have found the best approach is to setup squid + sslbump + privoxy. The last of which can mutilate all cookies to be session cookies. This effectively prevents lots of the trackers from functioning. I also always have my user agent molested to be a recent version of chrome on Windows 8 64 ( i have to adjust periodically). That way the user agent is dead common and they can't track individual devices behind my NAT as easily. I have a cron job that runs to release the DHCP lease from my ISP every night and gets a new address. I do get a different IP almost every day that way.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    5. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by JackieBrown · · Score: 2

      Sounds like you take allot of enjoyment browsing the web - or at least preparing to be able to browse the web.

    6. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      unless off course they ignore the 3rd party disabled cookies setting. is that possible even?

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    7. Re: Digital Advertising Alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I might just take that advice. I really would have thought facebook and otherd would have learned mot to target my "internet kind" as Im not ever going to sign up for Facebook to comment on something. My life has already been altered significantly by not being om fb and theres no question Ive had less options as a result. Im out too deep now to undo it all and go back.

    8. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Anything worth doing, is worth doing while geekily obsessing over all the details.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    9. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      No, that's enforced by the browser based on the domain name of the site setting the cookie, websites have no say in it.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      I enjoy the web a lot more than I do when browsing from somewhere I don't have this setup in place like on my mobile and stuff. I probably should replace my ssh VPN with openVPN so I can get a client and tunnel my mobile back home thru it all.

      A lot of ads and crap still slip through the filters and its bad enough but man I am always stunned to see what most people are putting up with.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    11. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Well that's good and good to know. Thanks.

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    12. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's funny - I looked at the page, and it basically told me "we can't opt you out of these sites' tracking you because your web browser is blocking third party cookies. Please allow third-party cookies to use our site."

      OR... I can just keep blocking third-party cookies, and routinely wiping all browsing data.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    13. Re:Digital Advertising Alliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just vagrant up a VM that provisions itself with a browser, uBlock, and other stuff when I start and end a browsing session. That way, fingerprint tracking is difficult to do over the long haul.

      Realistically, blocking cookies is a help, but doesn't do much. Visit eff.org's Panopticlick2 to see why.

  3. Opt Out Policy? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Fuck YOU Facebook.

    So, to Opt out of being tracked by you, I have to go to yet another place (which is not obvious) and sign up to not be tracked. Fuck you world which allows this shit to be acceptable.

    1) Use Tor
    2) Use Incognito Mode
    3) Time to block cookies, delete cookies, and so on.

    http://www.howtogeek.com/63721...

    Did I mention ... FUCK YOU FACEBOOK!

    --
    Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    1. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      For once I agree with you.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    2. Re:Opt Out Policy? by beh · · Score: 1

      Eloquently put, young one!

      Couldn't agree more.

    3. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Luthair · · Score: 2

      Not really different than any other advertising network. Just use an ad blocker and block the facebook domains for third party.

    4. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Incognito Mode only protects you from someone [with physical access to your machine] peeking into your surfing habits; your client won't display locally what the rest of the world knows.

    5. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Something about "broken clocks" ?? ;)

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    6. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "3) Time to block cookies, delete cookies, and so on."

      Kinda late to the party on that one. I have cookies set to rejected by default, use noscript, etc. It was time to do that a LONG time ago.

    7. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck YOU Facebook.

      What about 'fuck yous' to the site that host these annoying social media buttons that hover right in front of your face even when you scroll? These bottom-feeders are the root cause in selling away your privacy.

      And let's not forget the morons who designed web browsers giving ridiculous amount of access to third party websites.

    8. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3) Time to block cookies, delete cookies, and so on.

      Don't forget about localStorage. They may not be tied to cookies sometimes (open dev tools and type in "localStorage" on the console).

    9. Re: Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Had to happen at least once in a lifetime

    10. Re:Opt Out Policy? by mlw4428 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're mad because sites that provide free content let Facebook pay for the content YOU decide to consume and Facebook makes that money by tracking what you do (again on sites that YOU choose to go to) and selling adspace to advertisers they think you will like? How entitled and spoiled you people are. You just have to throw on an extension or two. In exchange you get to look at someone else's work (that they're expecting to get paid for) for free. This is like your being a freeloading bum who is being told that to keep pitching your tent in someone else's back yard, that you have to at least bury your shit in a hole and not take a dump on their grill. Boo-hoo. Don't browse the web or only go to those "marvelous" open source content pages that suck (or Wikipedia who will spam you for weeks asking for donations).

    11. Re:Opt Out Policy? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      You and I have disagreed about a variety of things, but I'm with you on this one.

      Fuck Facebook and all their cronies as well. Fuck them ALL.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    12. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you know that aint free

      It's not entitled to go to a free website and then find you've been sold. If you want money use a paywall and see if anyone else wants to pay. Behave like scum, expect to be treated like scum. 'Scummy is normal' is no defense, neither is everyone else is doing it. Grow up.

    13. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit, you actually came down from your kook tower to make sense for once.

    14. Re:Opt Out Policy? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Fuck you world which allows this shit to be acceptable.

      While I agree with Fuck You Facebook, we're in a world of information economy. Why I didn't even pay someone to post this reply to you, and we enjoy almost limitless content for free thanks to this bizarre economy where someone tries to make sense of our browsing habits.

      Facebook is nothing more than an advertising network just like any other in this case.

    15. Re:Opt Out Policy? by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      http://thehackernews.com/2016/05/audio-fingerprint.html/ Good luck with those methods...

    16. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      There a site out there that puts the so-called social trackers behind a toggle button for each. The audience is geeky, but it's by large (french speaking) Windows users and gamers that care about the news about the latest graphics driver or piece of hardware. Still, the web site has been around for as long as slashdot and like slashdot there's basic respect for the users.
      You still need blocking for the billions other web sites.

    17. Re: Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tool should release a new version of Ãnema with an updated list of things that can get fucked.

      That said, "Fuck smiley glad-hands with hidden agendas" is close enough.

    18. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here we go again. Did somebody forced you to provide content free of charge? If the answer is no, then fuck off, I have every right to view it the way I want it. If you're not happy then paywall it.

    19. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Websites can hide behind paywalls if they mind it. There is nothing scummy about blocking 3rd party crap.

    20. Re:Opt Out Policy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay with you if I switch stations on my radio when an ad comes on, without sending in a form to them stating where I was, and which station I switched to, each time, beforehand?

      So that I'm not "cheating" the radio station? Or, wait, maybe the fact some people will be listening to the radio "for free" and not listening to ads is their business model, and their issue.

    21. Re:Opt Out Policy? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      How entitled and spoiled you people are

      'republican typing' detected.

      but you didn't use enough of the magic keywords, like STEALING, and CONTENT and PIRATES.

      come on. you'll get a much better troll score if you hit more of the talking points from your party.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    22. Re:Opt Out Policy? by jenningsthecat · · Score: 1

      So you're mad because sites that provide free content let Facebook pay for the content YOU decide to consume...

      Most of the time I have no way of knowing beforehand that a site I'm about to visit has signed a deal with the Devil. Who do I ask? How do I know the answer is truthful? It's kinda like going on a date with someone who seems responsible and honest but whom you find out, (after the two of you have had sex), is indiscriminately promiscuous and riddled with STDs.

      How entitled and spoiled you people are.

      "Entitled and spoiled" for being indignant about being stalked around the Web? Grow up.

      You just have to throw on an extension or two.

      Which is essentially what GP said he was planning to do. He seemed more than a tad grouchy about it, but I really don't blame him. And perhaps he was also being angry on behalf of the people who don't even know that they should protect themselves against this shit, never mind knowing how to do it.

      In exchange you get to look at someone else's work (that they're expecting to get paid for) for free.

      All too often it's more like an attractive neighbour unexpectedly flashing you over the back fence and then expecting to be paid for it.

      --
      'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
    23. Re:Opt Out Policy? by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      Because these methods will result in 404 Not Found?

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  4. sick, sad, world by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Whatever happened to their motto "don't be evil"?

    Oh. wait, that wasn't them.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:sick, sad, world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is sad is that someone would believe such a motto in the first place, regardless of the company.

    2. Re:sick, sad, world by Salgak1 · · Score: 2

      Really. Although, more and more, I'm thinking Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Oracle, and all the rest, have started using "50 Shades of Grey" as the basis of their management philosophy. . .

    3. Re:sick, sad, world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > "Whatever happened to their motto "don't be evil"?"

      That was meant for us, not them.

    4. Re:sick, sad, world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only truth in this world is pervasive over-arching self-interest. Everything else is a lie believed by idiots and children.

    5. Re:sick, sad, world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believed the motto - in modified form.

      You know. The version that has the "n't" removed.

    6. Re:sick, sad, world by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      bonus points for the daria ref ;)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  5. I use Ublock Origin by Spy+Handler · · Score: 1

    will it block Facebook tracking ad shit?

    1. Re:I use Ublock Origin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not but something like Ghostery should do.

    2. Re:I use Ublock Origin by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Try enabling the Easy Privacy list in the uBlock options, that will nuke it. I also recommend installing Privacy Badger along side uBlock for the best possible protection from stalkers.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:I use Ublock Origin by Luthair · · Score: 1

      You'll need the social blocking list

  6. Op out is great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Give loads of personal information to some obscure body to pass on to arsebook so they do not track you.
        p.s. they will track you anyway. (technical issues)

  7. We've become Idiocracy by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When the wealth created by companies like Google, and FB(eventually?) is based upon advertising.
    Advertising?!? Really?

    Industrial Age
    Information Age
    Advertising Age

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    1. Re:We've become Idiocracy by Salgak1 · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot, I love you ! (and, it's got Electrolytes ! What nerds crave. . . )

    2. Re:We've become Idiocracy by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1

      Industrial Age
      Information Age
      Advertising Age
      Shoe Event Horizon

      (Radio version if you're not at work)

  8. facebook can go die in a fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seriously, facebook needs to go die in a fire, it contributes nothing useful to society, causes all sorts of mental health issues and invades privacy of people who want nothing to do with it.

    The Stasi ain't got shit on Facebook.

    1. Re:facebook can go die in a fire by h8sg8s · · Score: 1

      I'm over 50 and regularly deal with Millennials and other 'younger' folks on a professional basis and they fall into 2 distinct camps:
      1) Reasonable and interested in the wider world around them and where they fit into it. Well informed and knowledgeable.
      2) Glued to FB/Twitter/texting to such an extent that it has become their *only* source of information. These folks regularly fall into holes (figurative and literal), walk into utility poles and kill others while driving. These are some of the most shallow and self-absorbed beings I've ever encountered. They make me concerned for our species.

      Yes, I know this isn't limited to those on the younger end of life, but its effects seem most profound there.

      --
      Organization? You must be joking..
  9. Privacy Badger by ssam · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everyone here is already using Privacy Badger ( https://www.eff.org/privacybad... ) or similar right?

    1. Re:Privacy Badger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ublock Origin + Ghostery + Click&Clean

    2. Re:Privacy Badger by OzPeter · · Score: 1

      As per your link

      Will you be supporting any other browsers besides Chrome / Firefox?

      In the near future we hope to release Privacy Badger for Opera, Safari, and Firefox Mobile. Unfortunately at the moment we cannot support Internet Explorer, since current version IE appears to be incompatible with how Privacy Badger works at a technical level. (With that said, if you would like to work on porting Privacy Badger to other platforms, please let us know!)

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:Privacy Badger by Kargan · · Score: 1

      I wasn't. But I am now!

      --
      Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
  10. No, you cannot block this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not for long, at least. Now you can still block Facebook's domains, and possibly even their IP ranges (plural!). But eventually it will all be one big mess of dynamically allocated domains and content delivery network IP ranges. Should you decide to block those, you will inadvertently and unavoidably also block lots of resources that you need to get to view anything online. Ad blockers and privacy add-ons will not win this. A few more battles, maybe, but not the war.

    1. Re:No, you cannot block this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have a whitelist based dns setup at my house using dnsmasq. My router filters all domains unless I deem it worthy. Useful for domains that might be randomly generated.

    2. Re: No, you cannot block this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fear you are right. They probably plan to make cdn's the enterprise service bus for the general internet at large, if they haven't already. That would force u to take the ads and spyware whether u like it or not. What we need is a robust piece of software that bypasses the javascript sources in the header and gets them from alternate locations.

  11. Opting Out of Being REMINDED of Tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > So, to Opt out of being tracked by you,

    You are confused. You can not opt out of being tracked. Google, facebook, etc, they are all the same -- none of these opt-out settings actually stop them from tracking you.

    All you get by opting out is that they won't show you ads based on the data they have collected. But they are still collecting it and using it for other things like feeding it into profiling databases to target you in other ways - like what crap to send you in the mail and to resell to political campaigns for them to target you for phone calls. And if you ever stop opting out, they will use all the data they have been collecting to show you customized ads.

    Opting out is just opting out of being reminded they are tracking you. The only real way to opt out is to block them with tools like adblock, privacy badger, requestpolicy, self-destructing cookies, noscript. decentraleyes, disconnect, etc. And the big one that few people talk about - use a VPN and change your exit node frequently so they can not track you by IP address.

  12. I 'opt-out' by never keeping any cookies by kheldan · · Score: 1

    All cookies and cache get cleared when I close my browser, and I use NoScript, AdBlock, and a number of other plug-ins that keep that crap out of my browser in the first place. Failbook can enjoy tracking my middle finger.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    1. Re:I 'opt-out' by never keeping any cookies by Pow · · Score: 1

      This is a good solution but is there a way to add exceptions for some sites? If yes, which browser is this?
      I don't want to go through extra verification when logging into my online banking site because the cookies are missing or having to log into e.g. slashdot every time I restart the browser.

      Maybe a feature to override cookie TTL can solve this. Force maximum lifetime of cookie to be 30 seconds (configurable) except for whitelist hosts.

    2. Re:I 'opt-out' by never keeping any cookies by kheldan · · Score: 1

      I use an add-on for Firefox called "selective cookie delete" that allows you to create a whitelist (or blacklist) of sites to either keep or prevent cookies.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    3. Re:I 'opt-out' by never keeping any cookies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same here. I've set it up to auto delete all cookies and history when the browser is closed. But beware so called supercookies (you can get addons to delete them). That said, even after you've done that you still have to contend with browser fingerprinting, and there's sweet FA you can do about that... there are addons that claim to deal with it by randomly switching browser id strings and such, but in my experience they really do make you're browsing experience unbearable with random rendering, unreliable page load etc for obvious reasons.

  13. I assumed they were already doing that by Sloppy · · Score: 1

    I am totally shocked to see the word "begins" in the headline. Has anyone verified it's true? I thought the whole damn point of persuading websites into using "like" buttons and other widgety things, was that they were already extremely interested in people who don't directly use Facebook's website, so they wanted them to talk to those peoples' browsers on the side.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  14. Another reason to continue blocking EVERYTHING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ad blockers, cookie blockers, script blockers, cock blockers....

  15. What kind of topsy-turvy world are we living in?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Editor's note: link swapped with a non-paywall source

    Wait! Editors? Who actually edit? On Slashdot!?!

  16. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They can have fun getting past my nullroute, then.

  17. No you wont... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've already got every facebook related server blocked in the hosts file. Theres like 40 of them in there related to facebook now.

  18. Ghostery by mattwarden · · Score: 1

    You're welcome

    1. Re:Ghostery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ghostery has gone down the shitter with their new redesign. Previously you could opt-in to having them semi-anonymously share the list of trackers that you blocked, that is how they made their money. And that was enough to scare some people off.

      But now you can't even change ANY settings without going to their website, and they try really hard to trick you into creating an "account," its a total fustercluck. But the most trust-destroying thing they've done is to remove critical reviews from their listing on mozilla's website. Some reviewers have been complaining about it, and I didn't believe them until my own review got disappeared.

      Ghostery depends on us trusting them, which is especially important given their arms-length connection to the advertising industry. But they seem bound and determined to fuck that up.

      FWIW, I reverted back to the last 5.x release and locked it in permanently. When it stops getting updates to its block list, I will be moving on to privacy badger or some other more trustworthy protection.

  19. Hello Douglas Adams! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook will now display ads to web users who are not members of its social network, the company announced [...]
    Facebook has outlined these changes in its cookies policy page.

    What the fsck? They announce that they are going to build a hyperspace bypass through non-members in their cookie policy page? Whatever happened to disused lavatories?

  20. Looks like by no-body · · Score: 1

    we need an automatic cookie vacuum cleaner running every 30 seconds....

    1. Re:Looks like by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      You mean something like Self-destructing Cookies?

  21. Stalking and g'bye by h8sg8s · · Score: 1

    FB has smoothly transitioned from tracking to stalking. A big NOPE and goodbye to all my FB friends as I delete my account and never use it again.

    --
    Organization? You must be joking..
  22. For users that don't have a Facebook account... by entropy01 · · Score: 1

    "they can opt-out through Digital Advertising Alliance..." Thanks, but I opted out with script and ad blockers a looong time ago.

  23. easy solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go to /etc/hosts

    and add entry

    127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
    127.0.0.1 facebook.com

    and all other domains & subdomains from facebook.

    No more tracking!!!

  24. hosts file by 101percent · · Score: 1

    /etc/hosts guys

  25. to fuckerberg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FUCK off ..no really , there is a reason i do not use your garbage and its called fucking privacy , FUCK YOU you homo faggit queer loving bag biter
    TRACK THAT

    1. Re:to fuckerberg by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      Zuckerberg has already made his billions... he doesn't really care what you do.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
  26. I HATE FACEBOOK!!!! by FudRucker · · Score: 1

    some of my family and friends use facebook, so i tried it after a cousion goaded me in to signing on to a facebook account, i hate facebook, it is spammy and divisive and manipulative , i deleted my account and quit using facebook after only a few days, my friends have my phone number and email address so they can call or text or email me if they want to contact me, facebook can go to hell for all i care

    i hope somebody finds zuckerberg and sucker-punches him in the nose for me

    --
    Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
  27. Re:ding dong by Tsingi · · Score: 1

    Annoying content that you don't want to see and don't see if you block them. But you know that. Blocking Facebook Javascript might help a bit too.

  28. Best most efficient ad/tracker/threat blocker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus (slows you) + less security issues/complexity. Compliments firewalls (w/ layered drivers blocking less used IP addys vs. hosts blocking more used domains) & DNS (lightens dns load). Gets data via 10 security sites.

    Ads rob bandwidth/speed, security (malvertising), privacy (tracking) + anonymity.

    Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers) natively. Hosts != ClarityRay blockable (vs. souled-out to admen inferior wasteful redundant slow usermode addons)

    Works vs. caps & HTTP PUSH ads w/ firewalls.

    Avg. webpage = big as Doom http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... & ads = 40% of the size.

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/... (Verified by Malwarebytes' S. Burn "I've seen the code & it's safe" http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... )

  29. Intellectual Property by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My personal information including surfing habits etc. etc. is my intellectual Property, and I don't have to "opt out" via a contract with anybody else which would in effect be an "opt in" for that company.

    Any attempt to gather such information and sell or trade it will be a violation of my rights and will be espenianoge, and will be dealt with.

    I don't have facebook and never will, and any information about me that goes out, if it endangers or propagates or enables harm to my family members then Facebook, their officers and decision makers will be subject to a military response.

    Facebook is going way too far against people that have NO agreement with them. and contracts are NOT implied.

  30. Backwards system by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    Why do non-users have to Opt-Out of something they never signed up for? Shouldn't the correct method be that they have to opt-IN?!

  31. Shadow profiles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot to mention the shadow profiles which have been around for ages, as well.

  32. For the BEST hosts file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus (slows you) + less security issues/complexity. Compliments firewalls (w/ layered drivers blocking less used IP addys vs. hosts blocking more used domains) & DNS (lightens dns load). Gets data via 10 security sites.

    Ads rob bandwidth/speed, security (malvertising), privacy (tracking) + anonymity.

    Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers) natively. Hosts != ClarityRay blockable (vs. souled-out to admen inferior wasteful redundant slow usermode addons)

    Works vs. caps & HTTP PUSH ads w/ firewalls.

    Avg. webpage = big as Doom http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... & ads = 40% of the size.

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/... (Verified by Malwarebytes' S. Burn "I've seen the code & it's safe" http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... )

  33. "Hi, I'm Marky.... by swschrad · · Score: 1

    "I see you're not using Facebook. Can I help steal your identity and expose you to phisning attempts now, too?"

    and everybody still running Office 97 clicks.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  34. For the best possible hosts file by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus (slows you) + less security issues/complexity. Compliments firewalls (w/ layered drivers blocking less used IP addys vs. hosts blocking more used domains) & DNS (lightens dns load). Gets data via 10 security sites.

    Ads rob bandwidth/speed, security (malvertising), privacy (tracking) + anonymity.

    Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers) natively. Hosts != ClarityRay blockable (vs. souled-out to admen inferior wasteful redundant slow usermode addons)

    Works vs. caps & HTTP PUSH ads w/ firewalls.

    Avg. webpage = big as Doom http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... & ads = 40% of the size.

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/... (Verified by Malwarebytes' S. Burn "I've seen the code & it's safe" http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... )

  35. Re:ding dong by OutOnARock · · Score: 0

    it's the day....the internet....died....and we were signin'

    with all due respect to Don

  36. Re:ding dong by OutOnARock · · Score: 0

    *singing....singing

    de'money...de'money

    sorry before first coffee

  37. Zuck a dick. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Zuck a dick.

  38. Beginning? by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
    Anyone who keeps track of what is happening on their browser knows that Facebook has been tracking everyone for years.

    Years as in like - years. You have to do a little research into who it is that you are blocking, because they aren't as open as Google.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  39. Do you mean per month or per page? by tepples · · Score: 1

    If you want money use a paywall

    For some types of sites, particularly sites on which a user views only one or a few pages, a subscription cannot easily substitute for advertisements because very few people are willing to spend $4 for a whole month of access to a site just to read a single article. Selling access in granularity smaller than a month is impractical because of the transaction fees of both credit cards and Bitcoin, which tend to exceed 0.25 USD. Sites would need to band together and create a federated micropayment system. If only SatoshiPay supported more top-up options for viewers who don't already use Bitcoin...

  40. Ghostery = 'souled-out' & inferior vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnet C&C servers
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnet C&C servers
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnet C&C servers
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned/downed dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get past dns blocks
    12.) Keep off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up 2 ways (adblocks & hardcoded favs)
    14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
    15.) Ez data control
    16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use

    * ANSWER ="NO" @ all OR as well vs. hosts (natively vs. illogically inefficiently "Bolting on 'MoAr'").

    APK

    P.S.=> Addons do less than hosts FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + start w/ IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to work!

    Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

  41. UBlock = inferior + inefficient vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can UBlock do 17 items hosts do 4 speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. bad sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets
    3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS
    6.) Protect vs. poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam bad links
    9.) Protect vs. phish bad links
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get by dns blocks
    12.) Avoid dns request logs
    13.) Speed up 2 ways (adblocks + hardcodes)
    14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
    15.) Ez data control
    16.) Block ads more efficiently
    17.) UBlock now uses hosts (no DNS benefits vs. tracker or dns poisoning) - poor imitation = "sincerest form of flattery"

    ?

    Hosts = native vs. illogically "Bolting on 'MoAr'" & not ClarityRay blockable like addons.

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts do MORE w/ less in fast kernelmode & start before REDUNDANT inefficient slow usermode addons (as 1st resolver)

    Hosts ~3mb (current data) vs. threats/ads. UBlock = 63++ MB -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

  42. As if this is anything new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Install RequestPolicy and prepare to be shocked at how your simple request to popular site X actually is pulling in content from up to forty different sites. For the record it's been like this for pretty much the last decade. RequestPolicy is hardcore, and can make it a pain to use the web, but it's effective against that particular brand of bullshit.

    I'm also a huge fan of uBlock Origin and Self Destructing Cookies.

    Of course, this doesn't do shit to help with server side tracking such as access logs, and it also doesn't do shit to counteract browser fingerprinting.

    If more people would use tor it would help to put pressure on website owners everywhere to stop blindly blocking exit nodes. Too bad that's a pipe dream that won't ever come to pass.

  43. UBlock = inferior + inefficient vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can UBlock do 17 items hosts do 4 speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. bad sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets
    3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS
    6.) Protect vs. poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam bad links
    9.) Protect vs. phish bad links
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get by dns blocks
    12.) Avoid dns request logs
    13.) Speed up 2 ways (adblocks + hardcodes)
    14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
    15.) Ez data control
    16.) Block ads more efficiently
    17.) UBlock now uses hosts (no DNS benefits vs. tracker or dns poisoning) - poor imitation = "sincerest form of flattery"

    ?

    Hosts = native vs. illogically "Bolting on 'MoAr'" & not ClarityRay blockable like addons.

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts do MORE w/ less in fast kernelmode & start before REDUNDANT inefficient slow usermode addons (as 1st resolver)

    Hosts ~3mb (current data) vs. threats/ads. UBlock = 63++ MB -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

  44. Browser feature that cleans the cookies by Pow · · Score: 1

    Need browser feature that removes all cookies created by tab when tab is closed. Have ability to add exceptions for sites where you want the cookies to persist (like banking, slashdot, etc).

    Does anything like that exist?

    Incognito mode is great and all but I need exceptions to handful of sites where I want the cookies to persist.

    1. Re:Browser feature that cleans the cookies by ToddDTaft · · Score: 1

      Need browser feature that removes all cookies created by tab when tab is closed. Have ability to add exceptions for sites where you want the cookies to persist (like banking, slashdot, etc).

      Does anything like that exist?

      The Self-destructing cookies extension in Firefox does that. By default, all cookies created in a tab get deleted a few seconds after the tab is closed. You can set overrides on individual domains to either keep cookies until the entire browser is closed or permanently.

  45. Two words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Two words: Facebook Blows

  46. Inferior inefficient addons fail vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-4 32/64-bit http://www.bing.com/search?q=%...

    Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus (slows you) + less security issues/complexity. Compliments firewalls (w/ layered drivers blocking less used IP addys vs. hosts blocking more used domains) & DNS (lightens dns load). Gets data via 10 security sites.

    Ads rob bandwidth/speed, security (malvertising), privacy (tracking) + anonymity.

    Hosts add speed (hardcodes/adblocks), security (bad sites/poisoned dns), reliability (dns down), & anonymity (dns requestlogs/trackers) natively. Hosts != ClarityRay blockable (vs. souled-out to admen inferior wasteful redundant slow usermode addons)

    Works vs. caps & HTTP PUSH ads w/ firewalls.

    Avg. webpage = big as Doom http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... & ads = 40% of the size.

    APK

    P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/... (Verified by Malwarebytes' S. Burn "I've seen the code & it's safe" http://forum.hosts-file.net/vi... )

  47. javascript by JThundley · · Score: 1

    You can't opt-out without enabling Javascript. Fuck that shit.

  48. Re: ding dong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So im supposed to sign up for facebook so i can opt out of this? How long til the U.S. gets invaded? The world is only going to put up with so much of our pushing our shit laws and privacy invasions on them.

  49. Re:Ghostery = 'souled-out' & inferior vs. host by I4ko · · Score: 1

    Are you out of your freaking mind?

    1) Can hosts protect against shit served by the same server - NO
    2) Can hosts protect multiple devices all at once - NO
    3) Can hosts protect devices that don't allow access to hosts files - NO
    4) Can hosts protect from spam - NO, mail gets delivered, not requested
    5) Can hosts protect from inline javascript (one that is in the html body) - ding ding ding - we have a winner - NO
    6) Can you manage and monitor in a single place all that is getting blocked and who makes the requests with hosts - NO, with hosts you can't even monitor who makes requests where


    You are lying to all the gullible people by advertising hosts for something that they are not - the ultimate solution! Stop peddling them as a cure-all. They are just a single layer of the security onion, by far insufficient when standing alone.

    The proper solution is content filtering proxy like provoxy, DOM blocker inside the browser (Bingo! - Adblock/uBlock, etc), HTTP request redirector rules on your router to the privoxy proxy, DNS request redirect on the local router, a local DNS server with static entries (based on the hosts file collections), and block and log rules on the local router for the traffic hitting any of the predefined hosts, single use VMs with browsers that have webrtc, HTML5 local storage, flash, java, Silverlight and so on disabled as well.

    It's great that you are trying to raise awareness, but don't push hosts for what they are not.

  50. Ghostery = 'souled-out' & inferior vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can ghostery do 16 things hosts do for speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. malicious sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnet C&C servers
    3.) Protect vs. dynamic dns botnet C&C servers
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnet C&C servers
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS (reliability)
    6.) Protect vs. DNS redirect poisoned/downed dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam
    9.) Protect vs. phish
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get past dns blocks
    12.) Keep off dns request logs
    13.) Speed up 2 ways (adblocks & hardcoded favs)
    14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
    15.) Ez data control
    16.) Block ads more efficiently in cpu + memory use

    * ANSWER ="NO" @ all OR as well vs. hosts (natively vs. illogically inefficiently "Bolting on 'MoAr'").

    APK

    P.S.=> Addons do less than hosts FAR less efficiently - hosts do MORE w/ less + start w/ IP stack before REDUNDANT inefficient addons BEGIN to work!

    Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...

  51. Never Been a Facebook User by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Many years ago Facebook sent me multiple requests to join - with people that I know listed in the body of the e-mail. This can only be done through data collection.

    This creates a Facebook paradox. How do you get your data removed from Facebook when you were never a user, and never agreed to their terms of service?

  52. Ads are RARELY on same server by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject shithead - wake up, smell the coffee & get REAL (vs. your 1/2 truth lies). Yes, hosts CAN protect multiple devices easily (they run nearly everywhere). Devices that don't allow hosts = bullshit I do NOT want (nobody sane does). Yes, hosts protect vs. SPAM PAYLOAD LINKS moron (the TRUE DANGER in spam is this). Javascript disabling = easy on Opera 12.x (other browsers too) & only a FOOL lets javascript harbinger of 99% of malware or exploit run everywhere all the time.

    * You're a chump I can EASILY outthink & outsmart - see above - FUNNY HOW YOU CAN'T DO THE SAME TO ME HERE, point-by-point vs. mine here (as you "Run, Forrest: RUN" vs. them, you little dolt https://tech.slashdot.org/comm...

    You can "Bolt on 'MoAr'" using more & doing less proving you're STUPID & illogical!

    APK

    P.S.=> What "seals the deal" on PROOF of YOUR STUPIDITY? You downmod 'hiding' this same post when I last posted it in reply to you https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... , chump... apk

  53. UBlock = inferior + inefficient vs. hosts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can UBlock do 17 items hosts do 4 speed, security, & reliability:

    1.) Protect vs. bad sites (past ads)
    2.) Protect vs. fastflux botnets
    3.) Protect vs. dyndns botnets
    4.) Protect vs. DGA botnets
    5.) Protect vs. downed DNS
    6.) Protect vs. poisoned dns
    7.) Protect vs. trackers
    8.) Protect vs. spam bad links
    9.) Protect vs. phish bad links
    10.) Protect vs. caps
    11.) Get by dns blocks
    12.) Avoid dns request logs
    13.) Speed up 2 ways (adblocks + hardcodes)
    14.) Work on anything webbound multiplatform.
    15.) Ez data control
    16.) Block ads more efficiently
    17.) UBlock now uses hosts (no DNS benefits vs. tracker or dns poisoning) - poor imitation = "sincerest form of flattery"

    ?

    Hosts = native vs. illogically "Bolting on 'MoAr'" & not ClarityRay blockable like addons.

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts do MORE w/ less in fast kernelmode & start before REDUNDANT inefficient slow usermode addons (as 1st resolver)

    Hosts ~3mb (current data) vs. threats/ads. UBlock = 63++ MB -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...