- Autor: LiaraTsoni, 3 lata temuOcena: 4/5Tell me WHY are you using a UI library for display a couple of checkboxes ? What it will be the next time ? A virtual machine ? An add-on has to be light and efficient com'on.
Thx for your reply, I understand. But I'm not talking about the code size. The size doesn't really matter, I'm just need a couple of bytes for doing a infinite loop. Using a library take more CPU and memory than vanilla. Using it one time isn't really a problem, but when you have five add-ons with five dependencies each... Grrrr ! Anyway you're doing a good job, thanks for your add-on.Hi, thank you for your comment. I plan on using react later to expand the features the popup has. There have been quite a lot of requests for this. As well as an options page. I may switch to a smaller library in the future. Adding react also helped fix several UI bugs, and makes the current UI easier to build on.
FWIW, adding react only adds ~35kb to the packaged file, a %15 increase. Unpacked it is ~120kb. However the public suffix list, and multi-domain first party list combined are 160kb. So I didn't think it was a very significant size bump.
- Autor: Firefox user 14211116, 3 lata temuOcena: 4/5The add-on is good, accomplishes the essential as privacy.
The only inconvenience that it does not protect me from the fingerprint tracking.
I did two online tests(Am I unique?, Panopticlick EFF) with the extension enabled, and in both of them my test result was positive.TL;DR Panopticlick and Am I Unique use a homerolled assortment of tracking code that is impractical for commercial tracking.
I'll go into a little detail about Panopticlick to explain more. Panopticlick uses a deployment of the open source fingerprinting tool Fingerprintjs2, along with their own unique fingerprinting code.
I added some debug code and visited Panopticlick I see Privacy Possum detects the page accessing 12 API's that are marked for watching for fingerprinting. Except this is split over 3 different scripts:
Privacy watches for fingerprinting on *per script basis*, this is a reasonable assumption because, normally a websites tracking code is bundled into one place, so that the tracking info can be easily aggregated and used. I'm not aware of a real deployment where tracking is split up like this. It is practical for panopticlick (and Am I Unique) because they want to present information about your tracking independently, and manage the code to do that in a more practical way.
For a demonstration of the fingerprinting detection code, I usually point folks to:
I think it is worth considering cases like Panopticlick, or Am I Unique, because they can be used to evade PP's novel detection. But I have not seen a case like this in the wild.
- Autor: Firefox user 14025195, 3 lata temuOcena: 4/5The extension appears to work well, but there is not a lot of detail about what is going on. the extension lost a star for this. When more information is available on how and what is going on it will move to 5 stars if everything else remains that same.
- Autor: Firefox user 13909246, 3 lata temuOcena: 4/5Breaks too many sites, DuckDuckGo, Qwant and several others, even when those are whitelisted. The extension most likely includes browser-wide settings which remain active even if it is disabled for a given site.
The extension is praiseworthy and was adapted, as I understood it, from the Chrome extension, and maybe is that where sits the culprit.
One star because the extension is obviously not operational now, but five stars for the extension's very concern: privacy, anti-fingerprinting all in the scope of tracking, which is getting worse day by day.
So be kept up the improvable work.
EDIT with latest version 2018.5.7 : a TRUE progress!
DuckDuckGo, Qwant no longer break. The developer is reactive and obviously corrects, improves the extension according to feedback (and his GitHub page is the place to dialog).
Tough to deliver a rating when the racer is still a child. I believe more in sharing experiences than in ratings which anyway need to be explained. Because of my edit I'll keep 5 stars for the extension's purpose and switch from one to three stars, because I haven't tested yet enough sites in their relationship with the extension. Maybe 5/5 tomorrow or in the coming weeks?!
Anyway, I'm keeping now 'Privacy Possum' as it seems "operational", at least enough to bring more benefits than problems.Hi, thank you for your report! I've submitted a fix for the DDG and Qwant breakages. Can you please let me know what other sites are broken? I'd like to fix them.
The bug on DDG & Qwant were caused by the same issue (fixed here https://github.com/cowlicks/privacypossum/commit/15db4394af5a79e05b41b750fc23db8aa5b1ac3d )
You are correct about this being a browser wide thing, currently, we inject anti-fingerprinting scripts in every frame. There is a solution to this, but due to limitations in the browser extension api it may make the extension less effective in other ways. I'm currently looking into this. But for now, I've made the anti-fingerprinting code more robust to errors.
- Autor: Stealth, 3 lata temuOcena: 4/5Breaking DuckDuckGo is a show stopper for me.
Is it possible to show everything that is being blocked? (correction - I have uBlock, uMatrix, and DuckDuckGo Privacy App; when I disabled all three I saw that PP was blocking the items that it was formerly not seeing and hence not reporting)
Thank you for fixing it!