fastcompany.com
www.fastcompany.com

Mozilla’s system only measures the success rate of ads—it doesn’t help companies target those ads—and it’s less susceptible to abuse, EFF’s Lena Cohen told @FastCompany@flipboard.com. “It’s much more privacy-preserving than Google’s version of the same feature.”

https://mastodon.social/@eff/112922761259324925

Privacy experts say the new toggle is mostly harmless, but Firefox users saw it as a betrayal.

“They made this technology for advertisers, specifically,” says Jonah Aragon, founder of the Privacy Guides website. “There’s no direct benefit to the user in creating this. It’s software that only serves a party other than the user.”

  • LWD@lemm.ee
    2·
    3 months ago

    Okay, so the end result is a privacy drain for users, extra data that Mozilla slurps up but somehow does not benefit from, no benefit to legitimate advertisers (versus a/b url testing), and no draw for privacy invasive ones.

    Then WTF

    • Vincent@feddit.nl
      11·
      3 months ago

      Tell me, what data about you does anyone get? And why is there no benefit to legitimate advertisers who will be able to know which of their ads have resulted in sales, even if they don’t know anything about you specifically?

      The draw for privacy-invasive ones indeed needs a couple of extra steps, which requires being able to see the long-term vision: having a privacy-friendly alternative available enables both legislators to enact stricter legislation, as well as decrease the incentive to keep engaging in the cat-and-mouse game with browsers, trying to find new way to violate people’s privacy.

      • LWD@lemm.ee
        2·
        3 months ago

        Tell me, what data about you does anyone get?

        For starters, Mozilla Corp gets non-anonymous data like your IP address, time of connection, and all the advertisement telemetry.

        Then they tell you “trust us with this”. The problem is, they have already broken their trust by refusing to tell the user, and doubling down upon this.

        And why is there no benefit to legitimate advertisers

        Because advertisers already have better options.

        Method: PPA Topics Using different links
        Corporate creator Facebook Google -
        Needs users to trust 3rd party? Yes (Mozilla) Yes (Google) No
        ~% browsers it works on <3% >60% 100%
        Guaranteed privacy increase? No No No*

        *If you trust the advertiser, they can do it on their own. If you don’t trust the advertiser, then the additional third party does nothing.

        • Vincent@feddit.nl
          1·
          3 months ago

          Sorry, I meant: what data does anyone get through this new capability? Mozilla could always get your IP address and other connection data when e.g. Firefox checks for updates, or add-ons, or safebrowsing lists, etc. Could you name one or two things that are part of “all the advertisement telemetry” that is new?

          Because advertisers already have better options.

          Better in the sense that they provide the same information with privacy guarantees that are just as good?

          Also, why do you need a guaranteed privacy increase? Why would we want to miss “opportunity to get us a future with improved privacy for everyone”?

          • LWD@lemm.ee
            2·
            3 months ago

            Could you name one or two things that are part of “all the advertisement telemetry” that is new?

            If your argument is that nothing new is being collected, then there is no reason for Mozilla Corp to collect it and you agree with me that they should roll these changes back.

            Also, why do you need a guaranteed privacy increase?

            Because I hate it when corporations like Google and Mozilla lie by calling something private when it endangers privacy rather than enhancing it.

            Here’s a question for you: in what universe do corporations somehow implement Mozilla’s proprietary technology and actually increase privacy?

            • Vincent@feddit.nl
              1·
              3 months ago

              If your argument is that nothing new is being collected, then there is no reason for Mozilla Corp to collect it and you agree with me that they should roll these changes back.

              I’ll also argue that no new data is being collected for vertical tabs, but I don’t see why that should mean that vertical tabs should be rolled back.

              Here’s a question for you: in what universe do corporations somehow implement Mozilla’s proprietary technology and actually increase privacy?

              Hopefully in this universe, a couple of years down the road, when legislators have become confident that they can legislate away the most invasive practices without putting lots of potential voters out of a job.

              • LWD@lemm.ee
                2·
                3 months ago

                If you believe PPA isn’t collecting new data, then you haven’t pointed to it doing anything else. You make it out to be worthless, and I’m trying to ascertain whether you believe this authentically.

                Vertical tabs serve a distinct UX and UI function and I could write paragraphs about it. And even if I couldn’t, others have. For years.

                Nobody has asked for Mozilla’s bullshit until it was pushed on them, but I’d be happy to hear out your post-hoc rationalization if you have actual things it is rather than your interesting claims about what it isn’t.

                • Vincent@feddit.nl
                  1·
                  3 months ago

                  I’m saying it’s not collecting new personal data. It will be helping advertisers know how many of the clicks on a particular button were preceded by seeing a particular ad, but they won’t know a single thing about the people that did that.

                  • LWD@lemm.ee
                    2·
                    3 months ago

                    It’s just collecting the same data that people have already opted out of, and more often.

                    You are also using a misleading statement, either maliciously or unknowingly, to make a false statement:

                    • The misleading statement: “advertisers won’t know a thing about the people that clicked their ad”. While this may allegedly be correct, as Mozilla has claimed it, Mozilla has the capability and the private data (which they sell directly to advertising companies) to do this themselves.
                    • The false statement: “Mozilla is not collecting new personal data.” You are using Mozilla’s statement to assume this is the case, but it is not. Mozilla is collecting the extra personal data directly. Anonymization is not done on your browser.

                    Due to the fact that Mozilla has broken users trust by sneakily injecting this extra data collection, I don’t see any reason a rational person would presume Mozilla should be trusted on further statements regarding their sneaky activity. Do you?