Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Moderators: FranklinDM, Lootyhoof
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
I'd like to know if Better Privacy works with Pale Moon 26.0.3 x64 on Win 7 x64 and if it does, how do i install it since it says "Not available for Firefox 24.9" which is i'm guessing caused by the weird new User Agents used by Pale Moon 26.
Incidentally the link for Secret Agent here https://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/ ... ret-agent/ redirects to nowhere.
Incidentally the link for Secret Agent here https://addons.palemoon.org/extensions/ ... ret-agent/ redirects to nowhere.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
The link redirects to https://www.dephormation.org.uk/?page=81 and works fine here.
As for the better-privacy addon, install version 1.68.1 from here https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... /versions/ , its author updated it recently after a long time,as far as I know, because latest FF broke it.
As for the better-privacy addon, install version 1.68.1 from here https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... /versions/ , its author updated it recently after a long time,as far as I know, because latest FF broke it.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Actually this UA for AMO has been set in place before v26.0.0 of Pale Moon. Yes there's a good reason, but to put it simple it's there because we are as close as to Firefox v24.0 ESR (extension/add-on wise) and so keeping the range of compatibility issues to minimal. Though, really we're different and very much a diverging product/browser from Firefox (underthehood). Now two main points and of course many more show it all:Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:I'd like to know if Better Privacy works with Pale Moon 26.0.3 x64 on Win 7 x64 and if it does, how do i install it since it says "Not available for Firefox 24.9" which is i'm guessing caused by the weird new User Agents used by Pale Moon 26.
1.) Pale Moon v25+ we have forked-off from Firefox and changed our GUID,
2.) Pale Moon v26+ now brings forth a new layout/rendering called Goanna (another major milestone of independent development)
Alright not as simple as I'm rereading it. Well maybe MC or some other dev, user can chime in and explain better.
With Pale Moon by my side, surfing the web is quite enjoyable and takes my headaches away!
God is not punishing you, He is preparing you. Trust His plan, not your pain. #TrentShelton #RehabTime
God is not punishing you, He is preparing you. Trust His plan, not your pain. #TrentShelton #RehabTime
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
For some reason i can't load https://www.dephormation.org.uk/?page=81superA wrote:The link redirects to https://www.dephormation.org.uk/?page=81 and works fine here.
As for the better-privacy addon, install version 1.68.1 from here https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... /versions/ , its author updated it recently after a long time,as far as I know, because latest FF broke it.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Will there be a BetterPrivacy fork like ABL for adblockplus and Encrypted Web for HTTPS Everywhere?LimboSlam wrote: Actually this UA for AMO has been set in place before v26.0.0 of Pale Moon. Yes there's a good reason, but to put it simple it's there because we are as close as to Firefox v24.0 ESR (extension/add-on wise) and so keeping the range of compatibility issues to minimal. Though, really we're different and very much a diverging product/browser from Firefox (underthehood). Now two main points and of course many more show it all:
1.) Pale Moon v25+ we have forked-off from Firefox and changed our GUID,
2.) Pale Moon v26+ now brings forth a new layout/rendering called Goanna (another major milestone of independent development)
Alright not as simple as I'm rereading it. Well maybe MC or some other dev, user can chime in and explain better.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
That depends entirely on if the community is going to chip in by taking these forks under their wing or not.Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Will there be a BetterPrivacy fork like ABL for adblockplus and Encrypted Web for HTTPS Everywhere?
As stated many times over: We have a very full plate -- and then some -- with core development. We can't possibly take on extension development as well just because the original extension developer isn't willing or able to support Pale Moon natively (in which case it will break when it relies on specific functionality that we as a fork change away from Firefox's).
So, if you love certain extensions, don't mind some experimentation and learning something new, then go right ahead and fork it yourself*. It's really not that difficult, but it does require that you read and learn instead of just consume.
* Do check if the license is Free and Open Source before you do. The vast majority has FOSS licenses, but not all.
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
From BetterPrivacy Version 1.69 Released November 26, 2015Moonchild wrote:Do check if the license is Free and Open Source before you do.Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Will there be a BetterPrivacy fork... ?
content\LICENSE says in total:
"BetterPrivacy is freeware; Non-commercial use and distribution only!"
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
That's a usage and redistribution statement of intent only, meaning it's not to be considered open source unless there is actually a license header attached to the source files making it such.Burning Sun wrote:BetterPrivacy is freeware; Non-commercial use and distribution only!
"Sometimes, the best way to get what you want is to be a good person." -- Louis Rossmann
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
"Seek wisdom, not knowledge. Knowledge is of the past; wisdom is of the future." -- Native American proverb
"Linux makes everything difficult." -- Lyceus Anubite
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Hello,
I use
ublock Origin (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ock-origin) (in advanced user mode),
Selfdestructing Cookies (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ng-cookies),
RightToClick (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ghttoclick) (well not really privacy related - but comfortable, if a website won't copy you etc.),
EncryptedWeb
Greetings, Maria
I use
ublock Origin (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ock-origin) (in advanced user mode),
Selfdestructing Cookies (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ng-cookies),
RightToClick (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... ghttoclick) (well not really privacy related - but comfortable, if a website won't copy you etc.),
EncryptedWeb
Greetings, Maria
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Does Ghostery work with Pale Moon 26.1.0 (x64)?
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... c2d8dddf86
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... c2d8dddf86
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Yes, v5.4.4.1 still works:Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Does Ghostery work with Pale Moon 26.1.0 (x64)?
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... 4.1-signed
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
I've been using an old version of CanvasBlocker (0.1.3.1), which has a far less CPU load compared to the last time that I tried using Palemoon's built-in canvas blocking mechanism. The canvas testing website is still fooled by the CanvasBlocker, but I'm wondering if the old addon still holds up against websites that invested a lot into canvas tracking.Weishaupt wrote:Browsing the web nowadays with a vanilla browser is pretty much a disaster when it comes to privacy.
I know canvas tracking is an issue, however, that is solved by PM brilliantly, without the need for any additional extension. Using a default user agent is a privacy risk as well, but since the latest version of Random Agent Spoofer doesn't work it PM, I'm willing to let it slide for the time being.
I'm also using:
uBlock Origin 1.6.1
Self-Destructing Cookies 0.4.9
NoScript
Ghostery
Encrypted Web
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
What is canvas blocking and what is the canvas testing website?Go_To wrote:Palemoon's built-in canvas blocking mechanism. The canvas testing website is still fooled by the CanvasBlocker, but I'm wondering if the old addon still holds up against websites that invested a lot into canvas tracking.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canvas_fingerprintingCogito Ergo Sum wrote:What is canvas blocking and what is the canvas testing website?
http://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php ... poisondata
https://www.browserleaks.com/canvas/
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
It's yet another underhanded way of tracking, meant to track those who evade the usual means such as with cookies.Cogito Ergo Sum wrote: What is canvas blocking and what is the canvas testing website?
For a quickstart, try here and note your signature, also after reloading:
https://www.browserleaks.com/canvas#how-does-it-work
Then open about:config and set canvas.poisondata to true. That is a most excellent feature recently built in to Pale Moon. Your canvas signature will now change with every page load.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Ha, I also just went to https://panopticlick.eff.org to verify my guess that because there presumably are different canvas fingerprint algorithms, their signature would be different than the one from browserleaks. So with NoScript, I allowed javascript for eff.org but nevertheless still got no canvas signature reported because the results said that I have javascript disabled. I see now that for some reason they send me off to https://firstpartysimulator.org/tracker to do the testing. So I have to allow that second site as well. (They also have scripts from three other testing sites. I hadn't been to panopticlick for a while so this development is new to me. You can no longer easily see the difference between results when JS is enabled/disabled.)
Anyway, the point about NoScript is moot because panopticlick reports a Hash of canvas fingerprint.
Anyway, the point about NoScript is moot because panopticlick reports a Hash of canvas fingerprint.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
Since there is no other mention of licensing in file headers or anywhere else, that would ironically mean that technically BetterPrivacy is under usual copyright - even though the author seems to have wanted to make it Stallman-style "free".Moonchild wrote:That's a usage and redistribution statement of intent only, meaning it's not to be considered open source unless there is actually a license header attached to the source files making it such.Burning Sun wrote:BetterPrivacy is freeware; Non-commercial use and distribution only!
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
What about Secret Agent?Weishaupt wrote:...but since the latest version of Random Agent Spoofer doesn't work it PM
https://www.dephormation.org.uk/index.php?page=81
Though I have just now been trying it out and it seems that maybe it's slowing down the browser sporadically.
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
ThanksBurning Sun wrote:It's yet another underhanded way of tracking, meant to track those who evade the usual means such as with cookies.Cogito Ergo Sum wrote: What is canvas blocking and what is the canvas testing website?
For a quickstart, try here and note your signature, also after reloading:
https://www.browserleaks.com/canvas#how-does-it-work
Then open about:config and set canvas.poisondata to true. That is a most excellent feature recently built in to Pale Moon. Your canvas signature will now change with every page load.
What's the performance impact? Will i even see it?
Re: Let's discuss privacy enhancing extensions
I haven't noticed any difference since using it.Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:ThanksBurning Sun wrote: set canvas.poisondata to true.
What's the performance impact? Will i even see it?
It'd also be great to one day have the screen size (another fingerprinting measure) not reported accurately via javascript, but instead send the browser window size. I remember years ago when the panopticlick site mentioned that browser fingerprinting wasn't much in use at that point. But just a few months ago, I noticed that even my local supermarket's site was using fingerprinting from some company that sells that service to anybody and everybody.