So this, from Firefox, is fucking toxic: https://mstdn.social/@Lokjo/112772496939724214
You might be aware Chrome— a browser made by an ad company— has been trying to claw back the limitations recently placed on ad networks by the death of third-party cookies, and added new features that gather and report data directly to ad networks. You'd know this because Chrome displayed a popup.
If you're a Firefox user, what you probably don't know is Firefox added this feature and *has already turned it on without asking you*
This is weird & bad for so many reasons. But what I focus on is:
1. I believe, morally if not practically, this tracking is *worse* than the old 3rd-party cookies. This is because 3rd-party cookies were a legitimately useful tech that could be misused for ads. This tech is *designed* to benefit advertisers from word go, yet is installed on *your* computer, like Malware.
2. Firefox is *worse than Chrome* in their implementation of ad snitching, because Chrome enables it only after user consent.
Now to be clear, the disclosure Chrome provides to users is not *adequate*. Their wording of the "Ad Privacy" feature popup is highly disingenuous and the process to disable once notification is given is too complex and must be performed on a per-profile basis. But at least they *do it*, and to my knowledge don't track/send the data until the popup is displayed. Whereas Firefox just snuck this in in a software update, checked by default and you're probably learning about it now, on social media.
Other, loose angles to consider this from:
- Google/Firefox claim their tracking features are not "tracking" because they use something called "differential privacy". I don't have room to explain this class of technology, but I sincerely consider it to be fake. Without getting into the details, they provide *less* information to the advertisers than a cookie would have. But I'd prefer they provide none. Steps are taken to anonymize the data, but what is anonymized can often be de-anonymized.
- The language Google/Firefox use to describe their ad snitching policies just makes my blood boil, an insult on top of the injury of the features themselves. Google uses the label "Ad Privacy" for a feature group that strictly decreases privacy over doing nothing. Firefox calls it "Privacy-preserving ad measurement". You know what would preserve my privacy more? *Not measuring*. I understand why Google is lying to me to protect their own business, but Firefox is supposed to be a nonprofit. WTF.
- Firefox's "Privacy-preserving" ad tracking has other interesting issues. In another way the new ad snitching is worse than the old tracker cookies, Firefox doesn't *tell* you what data it's collected or reported, and unlike with cookies doesn't give you the ability to delete recorded "impressions".
Also interestingly, the feature is not available to *all* advertisers currently, only a "small number" of partner sites. *Firefox doesn't disclose who they are*, again making this worse than $GOOG.
- This event seems to tie in with other confusing developments around Mozilla as a company/"Foundation". I do not know enough about these issues to comment on them intelligently. I know only that Mozilla has, inexplicably for a nominal nonprofit, recently bought an advertising firm: https://mastodon.social/@jwz/112650295543215212
and that I have seen… let's say "criticism" of recent changes to the board makeup: https://www.spiceworks.com/tech/tech-general/news/mozilla-cpo-sues-company-over-disability-discrimination/
Anyway, I guess that's a lot of typing. The TLDR is:
- There is now a feature labeled "Privacy-preserving ad measurement" near the bottom of your Firefox Privacy settings. I recommend turning it off, or switching to a more privacy-conscious browser such as Google Chrome.
- I have filed two bugs on Firefox about this, which I am choosing not to link to dissuade brigading. If I have not been banned from the bug tracker by next week I will file another bug about the ChatGPT integration in nightly
Two updates to this thread.
Update 1: In this thread I complain Mozilla does not provide specific technical details about this feature. It turns out there *is* a document with the technical details, on Github:
https://github.com/mozilla/explainers/tree/main/ppa-experiment
It also explains (https://wiki.mozilla.org/Origin_Trials) which sites are participating in the feature.
I am linking this document because I believe the first five words do more to discredit what Mozilla is doing here than anything I could say:
"Mozilla is working with Meta"
Update 2: I didn't know this, but it turns out Apple Safari is *also* spying on what ads you view and click on, and sending that info (with some anonymization) directly to advertisers via a backchannel?
It's worse documented than the Firefox/Chrome versions, and like Firefox (unlike Chrome) there is no clickthrough consent. I don't expect better of Apple, but this *grates* given they're running big "A browser that's actually private." billboard ads in my neighborhood.
@mcc I've seen your tirades about the ad handling in the different browsers. I totally agree that the way Firefox is phasing in this experimental stuff is awful and dishonest.
But have you actually looked at what Firefox (and ISRG, the non-profit who brought&bring us letsencrypt) is trying?
It *does not* enable sites to do behaviour tracking so they can personalize ads.
It does relay *aggregate* info about which ads lead to site visits ("conversions" in web marketing speak). 1/x @koehntopp
@mcc (thanks for your patience) thing is, due to privacy mechanisms (that we want), the info chain which ad lead to a site visit no longer works. but the site that had the ad wants to get paid for annoying their readers with it. just displaying it pays nothing, the only reliable measure for its success and worth paying is conversions, i.e. the reader then clicked it to come to advertizer's site and read marketing blurb, do some shopping or whatever. 2/x
@koehntopp
@KarlE @mcc @koehntopp did the Referer header stop working?
