Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla Testing an Opt-Out System For Firefox Telemetry Collection (bleepingcomputer.com)
An anonymous reader writes: "Mozilla engineers are discussing plans to change the way Firefox collects usage data (telemetry), and the organization is currently preparing to test an opt-out clause so they could collect more data relevant to the browser's usage," reports Bleeping Computer. "In a Google Groups discussion that's been taking place since Monday, Mozilla engineers cite the lack of usable data the Foundation is currently receiving via its data collection program. The problem is that Firefox collects data from a very small fraction of its userbase, and this data may not be representative of the browser's real usage." Mozilla would like to fix this by flipping everyone's telemetry setting to enabled and adding an opt-out clause. Engineers also plan to embed Google's RAPPAR project [1, 2] for anonymous data collection.
Jumped to Waterfox several years ago. At the time it was the only 64 bit version of FF code but it has matured and while it still follows FF core it didn't disable plug-ins and it strips out tracking.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
You develop trust by not spying on your users.
I still use Firefox because NoScript, but I can't see myself still using it a year from now, the way things are going.
My first response: They're about to kill its best, remaining feature in the minds of many, and now they say, "Let me spy on you."
But I ultimately get what they're trying to do. After all this online complaining, they may finally be having to accept that they really need to know more about how people use their product. Considering how many people here have complained about how the Mozilla devs "don't know what we really want!! Why are they doing X??", this should be something they should consider doing.
Sounds like they're damned if they do, damned if they don't. Maybe us complainers should look in the mirror and realize we may be one of the toughest crowd of browser users in the world to please. "No, you can't collect my data!.... Wait - Why are you removing X? I USE THAT FEATURE! Don't you know that about your users?
Maybe that's why Google Chrome has outstripped Firefox over the last several years when it comes to user base size. They KNOW what most people want, even if we don't like to admit to everything we want?
I'm a loyal Firefox user - and I'll probably still opt-out while I grumble about losing most of my add-ons. But I won't honestly be able to say that Firefox's eventual demise will be on the Mozilla Foundation alone.
The constant update cycle, trying to become Chrome-but-worse, disabling treasured extensions and plugins, all of these tactics and more have cratered Firefox's market share, but some people still apparently have it installed on their system.
Clearly, these few remaining miscreants must be driven away as fast as possible. Default collection of private data should do the trick!
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
The knee-jerk reaction is that all telemetry is a privacy nightmare.
As a thought experiment, what kind of telemetry might be acceptable?
For example, suppose it were 2 integers collected weekly:
* number of HTTPS sites visited
* number of HTTP sites visited
Unavoidably, there would be metadata: IP address and date/time of data collection. So as well as the intended analytics ("what proportion of the sites users are visiting are HTTPS sites?") it would be possible to build a per-IP profile of number of sites visited over time.
Is this level of telemetry unacceptable?
If it is acceptable, then we've established that it is not telemetry per se that is bad but rather the data being collected.
Ongoing telemetry would require trust ("when I consented you were collecting two integers, but now you're collecting all sorts of other things") unless totally transparent, but perhaps even with total transparency the burden of verification that then falls on the user is too onerous.
I wonder if there could be a role for someone like the EFF to be the guardian of telemetry info, i.e. Firefox sends telemetry data to the EFF and they then decide whether it's ok or not, or anonymize it (e.g. strip out IP addresses in the above example), before sending it on to Mozilla. Of course, they'd want to be paid for this service, and since users reject the notion of paying for a browser the obvious payer would be Mozilla, but that creates moral hazard. Given that it'd be a public good, the government could run and/or fund it, but I suspect there's a large overlap between the set of people who have a problem with telemetry and the set of people who distrust their government.
.
Privacy-busting data collection is not going to fix that problem, as the data will more than likely be interpreted by the developers to confirm their misdirected vision.
Instead of data collection (something that is done because it is easy, not necessarily the proper solution), the Firefox developers need to take a step back and look at their vision for Firefox. That is the conversation that needs to take place with the Firefox users.
Offhand, I'd say that priority #1 is that the Firefox users don't want Firefox to continue on the goal of turning into a Chrome clone. With the addition of data collection, that goal is almost met.
I could go on, but I doubt if anyone is reading, they're probably drooling over all the data they will be collecting soon.