privacy

This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

KarnaSubarna, in Cover Your Tracks: Test how well your browser protect you from tracking:
@KarnaSubarna@lemmy.ml avatar

I personally consider this[1] to be the ultimate test of Browser fingerprint protection coverage. Let me know if you manage to find a way to defeat this test.

[1] abrahamjuliot.github.io/creepjs/

shortwavesurfer, in How are personal websites actually helpful for private expression?

If you want to be sure, what I would do is host it on my local machine and not use a typical domain, but set up and run it as an onion over tor.

Anticorp, in Google trashes its "DRM for the Web" API - gHacks Tech News

Google temporarily delays rollout of their DRM for Web until public attention shifts to something worse they propose that was always a smokescreen.

netchami, in Chromite - Any sensible reviews?

Don’t use Bromite, it’s unmaintained and insecure. If you like Bromite, use Cromite instead. IMO the best browser on Android is Mull. Also, Cromite is spelled without an ‘h’.

N4CHEM, in Chromite - Any sensible reviews?

As @netchami said, Bromite hasn’t been updated in months, it shouldn’t be used. Cromite is a proper successor forked by one of the contributors of Bromite.

Klooney16Klan, in Chromite - Any sensible reviews?

Just use Iceraven, most underrated!

jeena, in Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box.
@jeena@jemmy.jeena.net avatar

360° turn?

FarraigePlaisteach, in Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box.

The problem I see is that if they get too idealistic/absolutist, they will end up just like those examples you mentioned (Brave, TorBrowser, Librewolf); less successful.

mojo, in Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box.

Did you just group Brave with LibreWolf and Tor Browser lol

Pantherina,

Yup because they are all privacy hardened out of the Box.

Kata1yst,
@Kata1yst@kbin.social avatar

Can't agree with you on Brave. You're putting a lot of trust in a for profit company with no real transparency or accountability mechanism.

jherazob,
@jherazob@beehaw.org avatar

And involved in crypto BS

BananaTrifleViolin, in Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box.

Mozilla needs funding. By taking money from Google and DuckDuckGo specifically for search it allows Firefox to remain independent and the software it produces is underpins lots of other even more independent privacy respecting software.

The eco system around Firefox needs Firefox to survive. Unless a better funding source comes along Firefox would be in jeopardy. Having. Said that Thunderbird has been successfully turned around due to a well run community pursuing donations and volunteers.

It would also be good if countries stumped up some of the funding Mozilla and other crucial open source projects like Linux need, to maintain a strong software ecosystem. Similar to how many European countries fund national broadcasters to maintain media diversity.

ganymede,

this is the (un)fortunate reality.

unfortunate in that keeping a modern browser up to date is a serious task when you need to compete with the agenda and scale of google etc

fortunate in that its a relatively simple solution, the community needs to fund the software.

its tough though as i can imagine if they pulled the kind of popup shit wikipedia does, it will just drive people away. what people don’t realise ofc is that with chrome you are paying for it (with your data), but for some reason they’re not viewed in the equivalent light.

possiblylinux127, in Some questions about switching to more privacy friendly options

Lemming and lemmons made me laugh so hard

neuracnu, in Firefox needs a 180° turn to full privacy out of the box.
@neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

LibreWolf and the Tor browser would not exist as they do today if Mozilla was not taking money from Google and DuckDuckGo and all those ad companies to develop Firefox as free open source software that could be forked by privacy-forward groups.

So sure, it would be nice if Mozilla made a privacy-focused Firefox version natively, but if a handful of concessions (that I can continue to turn off) are what it takes to have a performant, full-featured, modern FOSS web browser, I’ll take that deal.

glasgitarrewelt, in How are personal websites actually helpful for private expression?

Firstly, (assuming self-hosting isnt an option) won’t you have to use google or AWS to host your website?

It makes me very sad, that there are many people who believe that the internet comes down to Google, Amazon and Facebook.

colourlesspony, in Matic is a $1,795 robot vacuum for people concerned about privacy

The app is ios only and you need to buy hepa bags every week for it. Those kind of kill it for me.

TonyTonyChopper,
@TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz avatar

app

it’ll be a paperweight when the company goes tits-up

colourlesspony,

I know right! I hate that so much new tech needs an app and will lose functionality/stop working if the company stop supporting it or you phone stop working with the app.

dditty,

The fact that it costs $1800 means it was dead on arrival for me. But I wish them the best if they can carve out a niche of privacy-focused iRobot/Roomba customers while bringing increased exposure to privacy issues

noodlejetski, in Matic is a $1,795 robot vacuum for people concerned about privacy

ooooor use whatever brand and model is compatible with Home Assistant

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • privacy@lemmy.ml
  • localhost
  • All magazines
  • Loading…
    Loading the web debug toolbar…
    Attempt #