11

9 comments

[–] xyzzy 4 points (+4|-0) 6 years ago

I hope uBlock has catched up

[–] smallpond [OP] 0 points (+0|-0) 6 years ago

Many websites say they require first-party cookies for functionality. It might be asking too much from script-blocking programs to distinguish between fake and real first-party cookies.

[–] ScorpioGlitch 3 points (+3|-0) 6 years ago

Nearly all of them lie. I lock down my browser so tight that nearly nothing gets through. Most of the time I'm looking at photos of cats or reading an article. There's no need to set a cookie or run a script. If the simply has to set a cookie, it goes away as soon as the tab is closed. Additionally, I don't stay logged into any sites so no way to attach it to my account. And, finally, I only use certain sites on one computer/device. The others have them and their associated domains blocked at the hosts level (did you know facebook owns over 1000 domains?)

[–] CDanger 0 points (+0|-0) 6 years ago

Sounds like good opsec. Some good additional ideas to add.

[–] xyzzy 0 points (+0|-0) 6 years ago

Many websites say they require first-party cookies for functionality.

They don't just say that, there are cookies for a reason.

It might be asking too much from script-blocking programs to distinguish between fake and real first-party cookies.

No, it works already with pretend-on-site images, so why not cookies?

In the end it's all a cat and mouse game between the consumer and the spammer.

[–] pembo210 3 points (+3|-0) 6 years ago

woo. Thinking about how this might mess with cloudflare or similar services makes my head hurt.

[–] seanking2919 2 points (+2|-0) 6 years ago

If anything, I'm making sure that my site stays far away from using Google Fonts, the Tag Manager thing, or any of that kind of crap as much as possible.

[–] jobes 1 points (+1|-0) 6 years ago

I mean, if took me one single day to implement Freetype to do every font you want. You don't need to use Google Fonts