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.
Firefox, faced with a shrinking user base after the extension extinction event that is Firefox 57 will monetize it's remaining users. Mozilla knows there are no good alternatives, Opera, Chrome, Microsoft, Apple, Vivaldi, Pale Moon all track users data in some way so they can get user data for money.
Not enough people were choosing to compromise their privacy, so we're going to do it for them.
Yet another reason to switch to Pale Moon if you haven't already done so.
Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
Mozilla is hellbent on killing their browser.
I might even consider using their shitty browser
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
Are you sure this is a geek site?
It is amazing that we have developed as a civilization in the days before all this privacy-busting data collection.
...Engineers also plan to embed Google's RAPPAR project [1, 2] for anonymous data collection....
Using the word "google" with the phrase "anonymous data collection" may invoke laughter. And disbelief.
You're getting a ton of data: Most Firefox users don't agree with the collection of "telemetry". What good could more data do when you're doing the opposite of what that data tells you?
Citation please?
Telemetry collection should be opt-in, not opt-out.
... else it just gets disabled/dropped from a future release.
"It seems like Mozilla will go out of their way to make major changes that users don't want and have expressed that they don't want"
They've been doing this for years, and it's the reason for their collapsing market share. Why start doing anything different today?
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.
Yeah, I know, it's with the best of intentions.
Then you must know something I don't.
Is this the same data that led to MozColonSlashSlashA's infantilization of the user interface around the late 20s (version number, that is)? What good is getting more data from more users if they will simply make bad decisions based on it? (I've been a grateful user of Classic Theme Restorer since then, but unfortunately it will fall victim to the coming addonpocalypse.)
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.
Firefox is used to visit WEBPAGES.
This is likely to run into a definition dispute, sometimes called "no true Scotsman", "misunderstood word", or "Layne's Law". To avoid this, we need to clarify something first:
"WEBPAGES" means "HTML documents", which are parsed into a DOM that is styled with CSS and edited in response to user actions with JavaScript. Is this what you meant? Or do you specifically refer to static HTML documents, whose only forms of user interaction are navigation, form submission, and checkbox-hack hiding and showing?
Anybody who claims that Firefox protects their privacy probably hasn't actually looked at Firefox's privacy policy.
Below are some excerpts from the Firefox privacy policy that is dated July 31, 2017.
Be sure to notice the type of information being collected and possibly even transmitted to third parties (including Google, some "Leanplum" company, a "mobile analytics vendor", and "certain developers"). We see terms like:
Here are the excerpts:
I'm assuming that your preference to omit "Everything else" implies omitting JavaScript. If so, then what do you prefer to replace JavaScript?
Web applications ought to run server-side Good luck having to click-wait-click-wait-click on server-side image map, with a full page reload each time, in order to use any web application with substantial interaction. Web applications that require JavaScript ought to be rewritten as native applications Not only does a native application tend to have even less "sandbox[ing] from the OS" than a web application, but it also works on only one operating system family. Even if using a multi-platform library such as Qt, the developer still needs to acquire an instance of each target platform on which to test each executable. Expect to see a lot more notices to the effect "Sorry, this application is not available for [your OS]. If you want to see this application on [your OS], please contribute to our crowdfunding campaign."They really are lowering their standards.
It is amazing that we have developed as a civilization in the days before all this privacy-busting data collection.
But how have we developed? When was the last thing you heard anything positive about new software? The number one complaint is that the vendors don't seem to know how users actually use the software and thus make stupid changes. This goes back a good 10+ years now.
Now they introduce telemetry to actually find out how users use software and the users lose their shit.
How did we develop? Poorly!
Indeed. I always cringe when telemetry is represented as "critical" in some way.
Even setting aside the politics of privacy, it's far from clear to me that telemetry has been, on the whole, all that much of a benefit in terms of software quality. Generally speaking, software quality has been declining for years, and I often see objectively bad decisions being made on the basis of telemetry.
Good use for telemetry: getting a better understanding of how your software is malfunctioning. Bad use for telemetry: using it to make or justify "user experience" decisions.
submit feedback linking to Slashdot articles so that our comments are hopefully read.
No need. I guarantee there are quite a lot of Mozillians who regularly read /.
Telemetry, he said, has shown that it confuses (some?) users, that's why it was removed.
If "confuses (some?) users" is even approximately the litmus test, then say goodbye to every single feature and dont stop there. You can say goodbye to things like the "back" button too.
"His name was James Damore."
Telemetry helps improve usability - if interpreted correctly.
This is the key. The problem is that it is extremely difficult to interpret telemetry data correctly.
When settings like telemetry are on a preferences page, average users won't navigate to the page.
Yeah, I've noticed this myself. It baffles me a bit, because when I use a program for the firs time, the very first thing I do is examine everything on the options pages.
But then, the first thing I do when I get a new appliance or device is read the instructions (often before completely unpacking it), so I'm admittedly a freak.
My use case is that Firefox has better development tools and works across Windows, Linux, macOS, Android with full extension support. I also find it uses less memory and don't really ever encounter crashes than competitors like Chrome (which I still use frequently, but only for testing stuff, not as a regular browser).
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
A lack of sufficient alternatives.
The next logical step is to set your sights higher up your own leg. And Mozilla is being oh-so-logical, although I fail to understand the peculiar logic that's driving them to squander the paltry remainder of their user base.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
One alternative to flipping everyone to enabled and having a tickbox you've got to discover to opt out is perhaps some sort of increasingly spaced out nagging? I'm thinking that everyone who isn't sending telemetry gets a nag dialogue that they can delay the re-appearance of in increasing intervals (e.g. for one month after first nag, 3 more months after second nag, 1 year after third nag and finally never nag me again after that).
If they get a load of take-up after nag 1 in the first month, they can use a future Firefox release to adjust the nag intervals or even remove them altogether. This way, it remains opt-in, but with some increasingly-less-frequent nag factor to persuare people to turn on the telemetry collection. I think opt-in has failed because no-one was nagged about it, so they simply didn't change the default settings.
I think you'd have to be quite careful about the wording in the nag dialogue - it would have to be "we need telemetry to improve the performance/reliability/security of future Firefox releases - by turning on telemetry collection, you will help us with this improvement effort and ultimately make Firefox a better browser for you." Users need to see some sort of benefit for giving up their telemetry data - just telling them you want the data isn't enough.
If the 'opt out clause' just means I have to go into settings and uncheck some boxes, and Mozilla otherwise isn't going to pull any Microsoft-level bullshit like quietly countermanding me again when I'm not looking, then that's fine.
If, on the other hand, they do something nasty, like remove the checkboxes entirely, and make you jump through a bunch of hoops to 'opt out', and then you have no way of independently verifying your 'opt out' choice has been taken seriously, then I say "screw you, you bastards, you have become everything you hate".
Because that https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvks70PD0Rswas before all the kewl millennials decided to use Agile/Scrum as the only way to develop code. No QA as your users are the testers with smily or frowns. Windows 10 has had no QA at all whatsoever as an example.
http://saveie6.com/
At least for anything even remotely identifying people. IP addresses, for example, fall under this. It always has to be opt-in.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
.
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.
Do you remember why Firefox was created, and why it took off? I certainly do, I remember using IIRC .6 of it, and it got smaller with each release. Why was that? because it was removing the Mozilla/Netscape crap. It also worked to put users in control of not just the browser experiance, but the browser.
Well what do you think happened when Mozilla/Netscape died and they took over Firefox as their flagship product? Sure they are ignoring their users and chase telemtry now admiting that the data could be wrong.
Back on topic with Telemtry. Anonymise the data, using generated tokens(can be regenerated any time). Option to regenerate each time on application launch Users can view data saved by tolken, and remove or even strip out data, such as
number of tabs open, number of tabs active, total sites visited since launch,
ram usage, cpu usage, System Info OS/RAM/CPU/Resolution, etc
domains, FQDN, or full URL.
Number and what Addons installed.
Preference changed, About:config options changed
I can go on, but you get the idea, where all data is viewable, and truly able to be removed being collected and what has been collected.
Also a way to input data, like a questionair with top feature, etc. And not just filled with what the dumbass I mean top level management who killed mozilla/netscape and is killing firefox.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
If *that's* the case, they care clearly ignoring it. FWIW, I *don't* have telemetry turned off, but recent builds of FireFox have gotten so much worse that even with the cost of rebuilding my bookmarks I'm starting to consider switching browsers. (For me that's a considerable cost, too. I've probably got over 1000 bookmarked sites that I occasionally visit, carefully organized into folders by topic.) And I've found the bookmarks sidebar to be one of the most useful features.
Anybody have a decent suggestion for a replacement browser on a 64-bit Linux system? Konqueror doesn't do a good job of displaying svg files. Most of the ones that I've looked at have a stripped down set of controls. Perhaps it's time to try SeaMonkey again, and see if they've got a 64-bit version working now...but I notice that it's still not in the Debian repository.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
It is always my suspicion that telemetry is being used as an excuse to justify decisions made for other reasons...though sometimes I'm at a loss to guess *what* those other reasons were. Often it just seems to be "I'm bored with the current layout, so let's change something.".
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Can't you just export and import your bookmarks to the new browser?
This space intentionally left blank
If Firefox is to have any hope of survival, this is what I think Mozilla needs to do starting right now:
1) Strip out all of this "telemetry" stupidity. That doesn't mean just disabling it. That means stripping it out completely. Remove the code. Throw it all away.
2) Get rid of the Australis UI, and get rid of the Photon UI nonsense we've been hearing about. Revert the UI back to how it looked in Firefox 3.6. This includes restoring the menu bar and restoring the status bar. Anyone who was responsible for Australis and/or Photon should be removed from the project.
3) Ditch the plan to stop supporting non-WebExtensions extensions starting with Firefox 57. If they go ahead with this, it could very well drive away many of the few remaining users, without bringing in any new users.
4) Remove Pocket, Hello, and stupid shit like that which they've added in lately. If anyone really wants to use that sort of shit, then they can install it as an extension.
5) Reduce Firefox's memory usage and increase its performance. These have been long-standing complaints. Steps 1), 2) and 4) may actually help with this, because they remove unnecessary crap from Firefox.
6) Focus on privacy. Make that Firefox's selling point. This is something that Chrome, for example, inherently can't compete with Firefox on. This includes forcing the user to opt in to anything that might result in information being sent to Mozilla or third parties, even if this might affect functionality like geolocation or address bar searches.
7) Kill the Rust and Servo projects. They're just a distraction, and take resources away from Firefox.
8) Gradually start using C++14, or even C++17. They address pretty much all of the problems that Rust is supposed to address, without Rust's many drawbacks. Modernize Firefox's C++ code with each release, eliminating custom code in favor of modern standard library code whenever possible
9) No more "social justice" bullshit. Focus only on software development. All resources, financial and otherwise, should go toward improving Firefox's performance, reducing its memory usage, and increasing the privacy it offers users. Any people who can't help with those goals should be fired or otherwise removed from the project.
10) Again, because this is so critical to Firefox's survival, focus on improving its performance, reducing its memory usage, and increasing the user privacy.
I think the problem with inherent with number 6 is that they need money from outside sources and those outside sources so far are heavily invested in advertising. a browser that puts privacy first is not compatible with those partners.
Mozilla needs to remember that Firefox is an open source project. Many people contribute to it, including from outside of the Mozilla Corporation(tm). It is against the spirit of open source for them to treat Firefox as a product that they own.
Firefox will have telemetry settings turned on by default so in order to turn them off, you have to launch Firefox, which then ironically sends telemetry data in the first place. So, all Firefox users phone home their computer info at least once regardless and are add-on free. I guess all of my new Firefox installs will be opened without the Internet on. Still better than Chrome's privacy.
I keep all of my bookmarks organized on a webpage that I call bookmarks.html. (Amazing, that.)
I have the home button on my web browsers all set to load ~/bookmarks.html.
So I can just click home, then search for the website I want and click on it.
Of course, the top entries bookmarks.html consist of the websites that I visit often.
Easy, cross-platform and fully portable between web browsers and machines.
On the occasion that I want to add a new bookmark I just write one into bookmarks.html with my handy dandy text editor.
If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
I would pay for a browser that behaved itself and guaranteed my privacy.
We pay for lots of other software, so why not a good browser?
I'm considering that, but it's a clearly worse option than the bookmarks sidebar. Konqueor has a bookmarks sidebar, but it doesn't seem to handle folders within the bookmarks sidebar. Minimalist GUIs are basically unusable for my use case. SeaMonkey worked fine as of 2000, but I think I may now be having more tabs open most of the time than it could then handle, and the current default version doesn't run on a 64-bit system. (I've downloaded a custom build, and may switch to that, but I haven't tested it yet. I *am*, however, still looking for alternatives to compare.)
P.S.: I don't need, or bloody *want* a GUI designed for a touchscreen tablet. That minimalist garbage is, to me, just garbage. If I can't come up with a better answer I may start running the browser in a virtual machine, awkward as that would be.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
you don't collect data at all?