Firefox browser to move ahead with ‘Do Not Track’ option

[The Straight Story]

The maker of the popular Firefox browser is moving ahead with plans to block the most common forms of Internet tracking, allowing hundreds of millions of users to limit who watches their movements across the Web, company officials said Wednesday.

The decision comes despite intense resistance from advertising groups, which have argued that tracking is essential to delivering well-targeted, lucrative ads that pay for many popular Internet services. When Firefox’s maker, Mozilla, first publicly suggested that it might limit blocking in February, one advertising executive called it “a nuclear first strike” against the industry.

Widespread release of the blocking technology remains months away, but Mozilla officials spoke confidently on Wednesday about the growing sophistication of tools they are building to limit the placement of “cookies” in the browsers of individual users.

These bits of code, often placed by data collection companies users have never heard of, allow the companies to learn what sites the browser visits for many months or even years. Tracking would still be allowed by Firefox if users gave a Web site express permission, or if users visited regularly — as is common with shopping, social media or news sites.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/firefox-browser-to-move-ahead-with-do-not-track/2013/06/19/b0ad618c-d8f6-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. Good for Firefox!

[dipsydoodle]

7. ditto

.

[Left Coast2020]

67. We should all send Firefox thank you notes.

It would warm their hearts.

[BlueStreak]

21. Fearless prediction: Google (Chrome) will NOT follow suit

considering that Google's entire business model is about drowning us in ads 24 x 7.

Good on Firefox.

[toddaa]

55. Use Chromium - the open source version of chrome

It lacks built in functionality for PDFs or Flash, but it also lacks all the Google tracking mechanisms.

[BlueStreak]

62. That's good to know. I wasn't aware of that.

But I don't see any advantage of using either variety of Chrome. Firefox does everything I need and does it very well.

[TM99]

73. Better yet

use Comodo Dragon. It has all of the privacy benefits of Chromium BUT it does support Flash and better pdf plugins like Foxit.

Check it out.

[valerief]

85. +1

[Gin]

2. I agree...way to go Firefox.

[TalkingDog]

3. Or you can addon Ghostery now.

Although I'm not sure "Ghostery" blocks all cookies.

[bemildred]

6. Ghostery works from a list, which gets updated, it seems to work fairly well. nt

[RKP5637]

26. Yep!!! Works well! n/t

[xtraxritical]

27. I've been using Firefox for years, with Ghostery too. It's great.

Another search engine that keeps your I.P. secret is ixquick.com

[enlightenment]

28. I use Ghostery and NoScript

along with Ad Blocker. I have a very tidy browser.

[TalkingDog]

45. Yep.

nt

[AllyCat]

82. I haven't used No Script. What does it do?

Is it a Firefox add-on? Thanks!

[enlightenment]

86. Yes, it's a FF add-on.

Basically, it allows you to control precisely what kind of Java script, Flash, etc is allowed on each site you visit. It can be a pain-in-the-arse unless you really know what different things do (I don't, so I occasionally find myself cursing at it), but it does prevent a lot of crap from being permanently loaded. It also tells you if you are being redirected in a malicious way.

If you trust a site, you can allow permanent access of the background stuff - or, if you really need to see something it is preventing, you can allow temporary access that ends when you close the window in your browser (or close the browser). It's a little cumbersome, but I think it has saved me from myself quite a few times.

Here's the information page: http://noscript.net/

[cprise]

70. 'What’s the difference between Ghostery and DNTMe?'

What’s the difference between Ghostery and DNTMe?

Ghostery and DNTMe are both simple, functional "starters" for people who want to protect their privacy online.
Some comparisons:

DNTMe is faster, based on page load/processing times.
DNTMe generates far fewer Javascript errors on the top 10,000 websites than Ghostery does.
Abine, the makers of DNTMe, is a consumer privacy company that’s funded by our customers and our investors. In contrast, the company that owns Ghostery (Evidon, formerly Better Advertising, Inc.) is funded by advertisers and businesses paying them for ad data and compliance.
Unlike Ghostery/Evidon, Abine doesn’t collect any of your data when you use DNTMe. All we see is that a download occurred, which lets us know how many users we have. You can start using DNTMe with one click and no exchange of your personal information. Ghostery collects data from users who opt into GhostRank.

http://www.abine.com/dntp/faq.php#q31

I have tried both and think DoNotTrackMe is the better one. It does let my browser run (much) faster than Ghostery does. And I believe Evidon/Ghostery is less motivated to do a good job in the long run because its founded on a conflict of interest (as all self-regulation schemes are).

[AllyCat]

81. Love Ghostery. I still get targetted ads at times,

but it is GREATLY reduced with this add-on and that leads me to believe it works as well as it can. Adding a no-track function would command more donation dollars from me.

[Hydra]

4. LOL

We'll see how long corp America supports the Fascism when it kills their profit margins.

Of course, they might just make adblocking and such illegal to counter it. Could to be fun to see if they grasp the sand more tightly or not.

[mike_c]

5. ad blocking is a known terrorist strategy....

Wait for it. It will come.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. They'll say we're stealing content without paying

Holder will go after the evil-doers, big-time.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

13. They'll just stop serving pages to Firefox browers...

...if it becomes unprofitable to do so.

Although I doubt it will come to that, actually. If they really want to, they could track it all internally by providing unique links as their RefIds, and matching things up in the back end. A lot of that is already being done, actually.

Haters are going to hate, but the people programming these things are providing a service that someone has to pay for.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Hydra]

17. Haters gonna hate?

I didn't install ghostery until I found out this Admin was having trouble following the laws(again).

I have no issues with ads or people trying to make a living, but when people break the law and there are ways to deal with that on your own end, then that's that.

[msongs]

18. sorry but posting unwanted cookiies on me is not "providing a service" to me nt

[JimDandy]

41. The value that free applications provide to their users

is paid for by ad placements that as users we have either implicitly or explicity agreed to VIEW only. Users do not want to be tracked, nor to be forced, via a user agreement, to have their every electronic movements monitored, though.

By the way, the implication of your (and also a few other DUers lately) assertion that you are "Reality Based" seems to be that "if it's shoved down your throat, you must take it and LIKE it". How very authoritarian of you. Let me dissappoint you right now and say that I and most other civil rights, civil liberties and privacy-type proponents, advocates and activists WON'T take it. And I would bet most American citizens are sick and tired of being told to do so, too.

Let me fix this for you:
-ConservativeDemocrat Proud Member of the Authoritarian Based Community.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

48. The free market will work it out...

...as it usually does. Nothing is forcing you to accept tracking information to help ad targeting, but identically nothing is forcing the people who are providing all these free applications to provide them to you, either. They have power bills to pay, after all.

So when I read hysterical posts about "laws will be passed" to forbid you from all ad-blocking by "corporatists" and other fictions from the fertile imaginations of prolific screed writers, I need to respond clearly that this won't happen. At worst, certain browsers will just be blocked from working with websites; more likely, they'll just find other ways of doing the same thing.

Again, "reality based" means based on reality, rather than fictions pulled from your posterior, which is a crackpot sort of thing. I've had this tagline mocking Rove ever since his execrable interview. I think it fits Republicans quite well. Alas, some D.U.ers seem to think I'm mocking them as well, which is sadly hilarious, as that leads to the conclusion that there is some little voice in people's head saying "maybe I really am being bit too hyperbolic - maybe Obama isn't really a fascist".

As for "Authoritarianism", that is a charge Libertarians level against Democrats, with more credibility than yours. In point of fact, I'm not telling you to LIKE anything. Rail all you want against the "big bad guv'mint". Wear that tri-corn hat if you want. Scream about the IRS (which holds more private info about you than the NSA does). Moan about all the potential abuse that could possibly happen, even if there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that it has. Lionize a guy who gave money to Ron Paul. Rant about how, to maintain privacy, we should not have any sort of defense systems or ability to track who paid what (necessary for any sort of tax system whatsoever). Please, be as insane as you want. Just don't expect all your over the top screaming and lying about President Obama to be free from fact checking, or other outright idiotic statements to pass without correction.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality based Community

// "You have about 49% of crackpots in your party. We have only 10." - Howard Dean to a Republican on Bill Maher's show

[rhett o rick]

54. Those that claim to know "reality" are fooling themselves and no one else.

If there is an objective reality out there, we would still disagree as to what it is.

[blackspade]

59. The 'free market' is an illusion.

There is no 'free market' and there never has been.
Capitalism is a system that redistributes wealth from labor to owners.
The owners have no interest in a 'free market'. It is of no use to them.

[tomp]

74. yeah, the intrinsic "working it out" of capitalism, that's working real well. nt

[Heywood J]

77. No one gives two shits about having a banner or inline image advertising some product or service,

the way it used to be. What people object to is being followed persistently and quietly into every website by a million data brokers operating in a regulatory vacuum, without any recourse or disclosure. Why does my online banking, for example, feel the need to serve pages with trackers and beacons that show up in Ghostery?

[RC]

80. It is already happening.

I have come across web paged that refuse to load, unless you allow their cookies. They pop up a message saying I need to enable my cookies.
Well, I have cookies enabled. What is stopping them is this:
Blocking Unwanted Connections with a Hosts File
http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm

You'd be amazed how much cleaner your web surfing is.

[Recursion]

16. No, they'll just manage their own sessions and pool information

Actually that would be a technically better model for them, since it doesn't rely on client-side reporting, which is always a security and stability worry.

[frazzled]

25. The profits are not just to corporate America

Talking Points Memo would probably go out of business if everyone got non-tracking browsing.

Try browsing for a pair of shoes or a piece of furniture or whatever on Google, then go to TPM: an ad for one of the companies you have just looked up will pop up immediately, and haunt you there for days or even weeks. TPM makes big-time ad revenues off of this kind of marketing. For that matter, to a lesser extent, DU probably does, too (though those of us who are members, thankfully, don't get ads).

[progressoid]

61. Yep. While we may not like it, ads pay for all of this "free" content we view.

[tblue]

39. It's a brilliant marketing move.

I really hope it happens.

[avaistheone1]

9. Good news!

Smart company.

[evilhime]

10. Might have to make them

my primary browser again . . . now will google man up with Chrome or are they too far down the kool-aid trail?

[Helen Borg]

11. Private Browsing?

I thought that "New Private Window" (Ctrl-Shift-P) in Firefox already did that:

"In a Private Browsing window, Firefox won't keep any browser history, search history, download history, web form history, cookies, or temporary internet files. However, files you download and bookmarks you make will be kept."

[JimDandy]

43. That's so other users of your computer

can't easily monitor what you've been doing while on the computer. That Private Browsing Window is something most teens or a cheating spouse, for example, might want to utilize, so that their browsing habits aren't discovered by someone in their own home.

Mozilla and other browser companies that have comparable computer-user-privacy functions could have been more clear in their explanation of what those functions actually do. A couple people I know were similarly confused about it.

[JDPriestly]

20. I only use Mozilla. I tried Chrome but it slowed my computer so much

that I couldn't stand it. Chrome seems to come with a lot of baggage on its back. But I am not knowledgeable about computer programming.

[Lordquinton]

42. Chrome has the ability to browse Incognito

which is pretty much the same thing, and has always been a part of it.

[LittleGirl]

12. been using firefox for years

and just installed a flashblock add on to block auto-play on videos that are posted on the web. I got this 'clue' from a user on Huffington post that was screaming in a comment at HP for those auto-play videos. I don't like having videos auto-play and that worked great.

good news.

[xtraxritical]

31. Great tip, thanks. H.P. is way overboard with graphics and video.

[Sherman A1]

14. Superb!!!!

[bullwinkle428]

15. In other words, the "I'm not a real American" option!

[DeSwiss]

19. K&R!!!

[rrneck]

22. Always remember that on the internet

if you aren't paying for the product, you are the product.

[LittleBlue]

23. Excellent!

Been with Firefox for years. Love them.

[JimDandy]

24. The ability to shut off tracking by the user

has been needed for as long as the capability to track has existed. Which was from the get-go. We should never have had to be grateful to Firefox for installing a privacy feature that they knew should have been there all along. That said, I AM grateful to whomever in that company kept pushing to make it happen.

Now the rest of the browser companies better follow suit or be left in the dust by users who are frustrated, annoyed, angered or simply fed up to here with the lack of privcacy in a technology that is fully capable of having very strong privacy features.

[DainBramaged]

29. Chrome has had it under advanced settings....

Send a ‘Do Not Track’ request with your browsing traffic

[MuseRider]

30. Track Me Not

is a pretty good add-on, I have used it for years and it doesn't screw anything up. I guess I have no real clue if it works but as long as I am on the computer it tells me what pages it says I am looking at and they are never close to what I am really looking at.

I would guess if someone really really cared they could get easily passed this but I doubt anyone needs to. I hope

[LiberalLovinLug]

32. Good for them

But I suppose a third party solution would spring up eventually. One is even mentioned here.

Boo fuckin Hoo for the big advertisers. I like how they phrase it as "losing money", like its being stolen from them simply because internet users can go back to NOT being tracked by marketers.

[davidwparker]

33. K&R

[joeglow3]

34. Why do people hate targeted advertising?

Back in the old days, you knew Sam the Butcher. He knew what you liked and would even call you when he got cuts of meat in you liked. Your pharmacist knew your cycle and would make sure to have on hand what you wanted.

As a society, we decided we like the cheaper prices that come with big box stores that rely on anonymity and volume. This allows them the ability to provide the same service that your got from your pharmacist and Sam the Butcher, while maintaining the cheaper prices. I love how people bitch about not having Sam's familiarity with your purchasing habits, but then bitch when stores try to find other ways to provide it.

Now, no matter the outcome, the government should have ZERO access to this.

[The Straight Story]

36. Well, let me give you an example

You go to Fark.com to read some news. One of the trackers there is NewsMax. You can turn that off (as others have mentioned, use Ghostery - it shows you who is tracking you and you can toggle them on and off).

I don't mind targeted when it is a site I am on like amazon, new egg, etc or a movie site that suggests movies.

Personally I don't mind adverts on sites but I don't want everything targeted just to me as I like to see new things - I don't like big companies tracking where I go online or what I do in my spare time.

[alp227]

71. Do you find personalized advertising unethical enough to be banned?

I wonder how much people would be willing to pay for the web per click without such advertising. I am glad there is a "do not track" option a la the "Do Not Call" list for telemarketers. Remember, people make livings with advertising & marketing.

[Lordquinton]

44. Let's fill in that anoalogy a bit

You go to Sam the butcher and get your meat. As you walk home, you see a poster for your favorite meat, then a billboard, then someone walks up to you with a flier for your favorite meat, and this continues for days or even weeks.

That is only one thing wrong with it.

[joeglow3]

51. I'll take it a step further

I am checking out the cute couple down the street and walk right by the poster. Then, I answer my phone and pass right under the billboard. I then ignore the guy with the flyer, as if I am on the strip in Vegas.

[Heywood J]

78. Sam the Butcher doesn't sell my private information to others when I deal with him.

And I'll pay more for that. The question I asked upthread was why my online banking session contains undisclosed trackers and beacons. No targeted ad company deserves to step between me and the bank or be allowed into my SSL session. No one asked my permission for this and none was ever granted.

That's a big part of why I hate targeted advertising.

[Generic Other]

35. That plus adblock is a good start

The dataminers can go to hell.

[FreeState]

37. Firefox founder, anti-gay pro-prop8 supporter

thats where your money goes...

http://www.queerty.com/l-a-times-javascript-inventor-gave-1000-to-pro-prop-8-forces-20120404/

The Los Angeles Times is reporting Brendan Eich, the co-founder of Mozilla and the inventor of JavaScript, donated $1,000 to the Proposition 8 Fund, which worked to pass a marriage-equality ban in California.

Despite some legal wrangling, the names, home states and employers of Prop 8 donors’ are on the public record and have been tallied by the Times in a handy online database. (It also lists people who contributed against the ban.) Thankfully, it appears Eich (right) was the only staffer from Mozilla—which operates Firefox, the Web browser you’re probably reading this on—to cough up some dough for the haters.

Y’know, there are a lot of ugly stereotypes about computer programmers, but we’d never put “homophobes” among them—Eich just makes his fellow tech nerds look bad.

[TalkingDog]

46. Ermmmm.....what money?

Open Source software that you can download for free and has no ads or unwanted add ons... how am I giving him money exactly?

[FreeState]

52. Yep they make money off of Firefox

http://www.yalelawtech.org/ip-in-the-digital-age/how-does-firefox-make-money-again/

[TalkingDog]

57. Nope. Sorry. Try again.

Soon enough Mozilla also secured rather lucrative deals with google and other popular search engines, such that whenever firefox provides a default search through these engines they get paid for the traffic generated, with the transactions monitored by the Mozilla Corporation. These deals account for over 80% of Mozilla’s funds.

You said, and I quote: "thats where your money goes... "

So I'll ask again: How am I giving "them" money by using Firefox?

[starroute]

38. I use the CookieCuller and ShareMeNot add-ons

CookieCuller wipes out all cookies every time you close the browser except the ones you mark as protected. (Like the ones that automatically log you in to DU.)

ShareMeNot keeps things like the Facebook "Like" button or the Twitter "Tweet" button that you see on so many pages from sending back information about your browsing habits unless you choose to click on them.

[klook]

40. The "Cookie" app on the Mac is helpful.

Cookie gives you options for controlling tracking cookies, Flash cookies, and databases that are stored on your computer without your knowledge or consent.

After I installed this app, it was very enlightening to see all the persistent cookies and unsolicited tracking mechanisms on my computer. I'm also able to preserve tracking cookies if I want to for convenience.

This interview with a guy in the biz is interesting, not only because he says the tracking cookie is going away within 5 years. He offers insights into how advertisers aggregate and use your data, and he and the commenters on the article share some ideas about marketing stuff in a less invasive way.

Personally, I basically want advertisers to leave me alone and let me see the content I'm interested in without infringing on my privacy. And I sure as hell don't want the government, spammers, or snoopers of any sort monitoring me or collecting my information without my authorization. So I will use all the data defenses I can find when online, and encourage others to do the same.

[Snarkoleptic]

47. Better privacy is another nice add on for Firefox. It cleans LSO flash "supercookies"

[marmar]

49. OK, I'm going to stop complaining about the constant Firefox updates.....

Kudos Mozilla !!!

[AsahinaKimi]

50. I just checked and this ap

is available to use now. Cool beans..

[Apophis]

53. That's awesome.

[snot]

56. Firefox already blocks cookies if you want it to.

I've got mine set to ask me before setting cookies, so I have some that are necessary and for my benefit -- such as "do not track" cookies -- but no others.

So I'm confused.

[blackspade]

58. Firefox rules.

that is all.

[cantbeserious]

60. Bravo Firefox

eom

[marions ghost]

63. OK

a step in the right direction

Mozilla

[Spitfire of ATJ]

64. What kind of "Internet services" do they expect Linux users to pay for?

[Nanjing to Seoul]

65. It's why I use Mozilla.

[greiner3]

66. ???????????????

While it's not an 'approved' Add-on, I've been using Do Not Track Me (DNTM) in my Firefox browser for several months.

This news may be that Firefox has now 'officially' added DNTM as an approved add-on; or something like that.

I also use No-Script and Add-Block (Sorry Skinner!)

As some have also noted, Ghostery is another good Add-On but I've not used it personally.

Then there are the various sites, such as TorProject, and others.

https://www.torproject.org/

These sites direct ALL of your internet traffic through their servers, ensuring that there is NO ONE able to keep tabs on you.

Check it out!

[yonder]

69. ditto on the "sorry Skinner" but

I cannot stand the constant in-your-face advertising that our culture has seemed to embrace. No matter where you look... here, there, no, up here, look over there, out the window, through the window, on that shirt, everywhere. Don't the marketing types call them "jolts"? Damn, if I'm curious about something or want something, I'll look for it myself and hopefully on my own terms.

I've been using Add Block for years. I have just started using Ghostery, DNTM and No Script. So far so good and thanks for the link to torproject. I'll be checking that out.

[steve2470]

68. IE10 has this feature also

http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/browser/donottrack/

Opera is my favorite browser, just adding this for information.

[Warpy]

72. Ghostery is already offered as an add on

It displays all the outfits that track internet usage and allow the user to block them as desired.

It managed to get rid of some really annoying popups that resisted both Ad Aware and Malwarebytes, along with my AV.

Blocking all of them can make pages display oddly. However, I've been shutting them down like crazy and everything has been loading faster and I got rid of those damned popups.

[Bradj5]

75. 2 search engines that respect privacy

duckduckgo.com startpage.com

[tnlurker]

76. For Later reading

[HCE SuiGeneris]

79. Duck Duck Go

https://duckduckgo.com/

Surf engine that professes to work anonymously...

Firefox rocks.

[Auggie]

83. Hey Apple ... how about Safari?

[vkkv]

84. Much like the Gold Rush, regulations? Who needs regulations?!

Tracking should have been outlawed from the very beginning.

And tracking likely would have been outlawed if the Web's popularity hadn't exploded so quickly. Much like the Gold Rush, regulations? Who needs regulations?!

[tridim]

87. Too bad Firefox is just about dead.

It currently stands at ~14% market share on my sites.

Advertisers will dump a 14% player in a heartbeat.

[Xithras]

88. Depends on the source, but generally true.

Most stats put the Firefox numbers at 15%-20%, but it's been in a long & slow decline for a number of years now. Again, depending on the numbers you look at, somewhere between 1/3 and 1/2 of Firefox users have abandoned the browser since 2010 (when its market share briefly peaked just under 40%).

A combination of Chrome/Chromium and Safari have been winning away Firefox users, and for good reason. Firefox used to be a lean and fast browser, but it tends to be slow, bloated and buggy nowadays. One analysis a few years ago showed that the modern versions of Firefox had more bugs than IE and Chrome COMBINED.

Firefox, like many browsers before it, fell victim to "kitchen sink syndrome". People got sick of it and switched.