• @mholiv
    link
    English
    77 months ago

    Everyone should be using Privacy Badger.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -57 months ago

        Obsolete imo, there are many other extensions that do the exact same thing. Its not that I dont trust Privacy Badger, I just don’t see the point in trusting it when it offers nothing new.

        • HubertManne
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          why are you trusting the other extensions over privacy badger? Trust wise privacy badger coming out of eff is high on my list.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -1
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            uBlock has as far as I know all the same features (and many more), a better reputation (anecdotally), and is a single, extremely common browser extension (if you care about being fingerprinted through having multiple extensions, that is an advantage).

            I don’t really care if the EFF endores the tool, as it doesnt have any unique features.

            • HubertManne
              link
              fedilink
              -17 months ago

              ah see that makes sense. I only use no script and privacy badger as sorta a backup for when I allow pages. and I guess to long didn’t read if you include that in this kind of thing. I don’t use much beyond no script for similar reason you don’t see the need to use privacy badger.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                NoScript is great for blocking Javascript on websites, it even comes pre-installed on Tor Browser. Highly recommend either NoScript or GNU LibreJS (which blocks all Javascript it deems “non-trivial” or unfree) for Javascript blocking.

                For your use case, I would just uninstall Privacy Badger and use uBlock. You sound like you don’t value your convenience super highly (because you use noscript :)), so I would take a look at the advanced user settings in uBlock. It will show every domain attempting to be loaded on a website, and you can pick and choose which you want to allow / block globally or allow / block per-site. You can also block large media elements, remote fonts, among some other things I can’t remember off top.

                • HubertManne
                  link
                  fedilink
                  17 months ago

                  yeah but for me privacy badger is on because it comes from the eff who I trust highly. I don’t know enough about ublock to care to put it on. If I was not doing privacy badger I would replace it with nothing.

    • LeoOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      37 months ago

      I’m with them… why?

      • @killeronthecorner
        link
        English
        27 months ago

        Turns out they didn’t have a reason, they just don’t understand how the tools work

        • @killeronthecorner
          link
          English
          37 months ago

          But they serve different purposes? I use privacy badger for auto denial of cookies. Origin doesn’t do that.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -3
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            Brave and Firefox both do that. I dont know about Chromium based browsers in this regard, but Firefox’s total cookie protection already isolates cookies per-site.

            Both browsers’ adblockers will block domains ID’d as trackers, so there are no cookies to delete from any domain I would want to.

            The more I think about it, why do you need that feature? Firefox and uBlock block tracking domains (and therefore cookies), and uBlock can be configured to block any domain you want.

            So if your use case is: “I need any site I visit that is not in a tracker list to have all of its cookies denied, but I don’t want to block cookies through my browser or block the entire domain.”

            Then Privacy Badger does have one feature uBlock does not, and its that one. However, because its not recommendable to use two ad blockers at the same time (i.e. Privacy Badger + uBlock) (see my other comment), Privacy Badger is still obsolete.

            If you need that edge case functionality, download Cookie AutoDelete

            • @killeronthecorner
              link
              English
              27 months ago

              I’m talking about auto denial of consent, not blocking of tracking cookies after consent. And I didn’t say “block all cookies”, you’re reaching.

              Also they simply aren’t the same thing, there is overlap in functionality. You can read more about that from one of the devs here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31680164

              You’ll also find a dozen others successfully using both of them in tandem in that thread. Taking a negative attitude towards using multiple plugins because it’s “not recommended” doesn’t change their distinct uses. If you prefer an easy life and would rather have one plugin because you just prefer one plugin, that’s your choice.

              My multi browser plugin + PiHole + USG setup has been working wonderfully for years, so I’ll take the evidence in front of my eyes over the recommendation of someone who doesn’t even understand the disjoint features of the plugins.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -1
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                I don’t see anything in that thread about consent banners, only that privacy badger tries to identify trackers not on its blocklist, a feature I don’t want. I also don’t understand why blocking consent to receive cookies is at all useful when you can simply block the cookie after consent.

                On the off chance you’re talking about blocking cookie consent banners (i.e. the popups on websites that ask your consent to send certain cookies), uBlock does that.

                I’m sure your PiHole and USG almost fully cover any downsides to your below average choice in browser extension.

                something works well ≠ whole thing good

                • @killeronthecorner
                  link
                  English
                  17 months ago

                  uBlock does not do that for a cohort of websites for which I have tested it.

                  You’re acting like I haven’t tested this setup when I’ve told you that I have. Again, the evidence in front of your own eyes is a good place to start so try some testing yourself to understand where the limits of each reside.