Add-on companies are selling the browsing history of millions of users to third-parties according to a report that aired on German national TV.
Reporters of Panorama managed to gain access to a large data collection that contained the browsing history of roughly 3 million German Internet users.
The data was collected by companies that produce browser extensions for various popular browsers such as Chrome and Firefox.
Panorama did mention only one add-on, Web of Trust or WoT, but did not fail to mention that the data was collected by multiple browser extensions.
The data that Panorama bought from brokers contained more than ten billion web addresses. The data was not fully anonymized, as the team managed to identify people in various ways.
The web address, URL, for instance revealed user IDs, emails or names for instance. This was the case for PayPal (email), for Skype (user name) or an online check-in of an airline.
Making the web more trust-worthy (for our advertisers, goy)
Gabriel King
what could possibly go wrong?
Angel Turner
;^)
David Rodriguez
The first time I remember hearing of Web of Trust was when an another user told me his browser said a link I posted was unsafe.
It was a white nationalist publication that has been around since the days of BBS. There was nothing unsafe about it asides for pointing out the jew.
I'm sure Ghostery is another addon that sells data.
Hudson Reyes
"Hate-speech" websites get an instant red rating. Anything nsfw gets red too. "Controversial" websites get yellow.
Isaiah Murphy
Nice, it stops people from browsing a site for retards
Julian Edwards
The only retard here is the person who would use a free service that spies on them and sells the data.
I'm pretty sure Facebook began censoring Wikileaks links after it was entered into the MyWOT database. A website that was fine for years instantly becomes 'untrustworthy' for publishing leaked emails from a corrupt politician.
Jordan Hernandez
...
Daniel Lewis
Yep, nothing to be sold, just direct to NSA
Charles Cox
How is that different than using anything else on the internet?
Jaxson Jackson
U wot m8 trying to go to a cheeky site ar' ya
Robert Diaz
the motherfuckers. I used and liked that extension
Nathaniel Rogers
...
Liam Nguyen
You obviously know nothing about Tor.
Joseph Carter
it isn't that's the point
I wish you were just pretending to be retarded but we both know it isn't so
Andrew Phillips
This is exactly the reason you should be wary of any Firefox extension made by a company.
Torbrowser comes with NoScript, which means that your data is indeed being sold to Informaction. Sorry fam.
Hudson Sullivan
I don't save any sort of history Your move jews.
Jose Barnes
just because your history doesn't get recorded for your access it doesn't mean we don't get it you stupid fucking gentile
Hunter Price
Do you have any proof that their mining data? And if so do you recommend any other addons to block scripts? Should I just stop using the internet all together and focus on encrypted carrier pigeons?
Hunter Price
umatrix
Charles Evans
In my experience nsfw sites don't get red with web of trust, and I've been using it for years.
In that case, I'll keep using it so I can avoid commercial profiling & sales of my browsing history. Thanks fam!
If you are scrapping the Tor protocol, Tor browser, and Noscript protections all based on "Potentially Unwanted Program" adware in a completely different product, you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater, son.
I use a lot of browser extensions and I worry about this. I use most of the ones recommended on privacytools.io but it seems like a lot. Even though they all claim to speed up browsing I think all of them together slows down Firefox.
Eli Ramirez
remember it's nothing it's just tinfoil stupid pol
Michael Cox
Web of Trust has been removed from all the major addon sites.
This. I've definitely noticed it. Sites may be technically loading faster because so much bullshit never has a chance to come down the pipe, but firefox itself becomes noticeably slower. Its just trading website bloat for browser bloat.
William Anderson
WOT is a Finnish company.
Robert Watson
AROUND FINNS THE ICE IS THIN
Carson Morgan
DID SOMEONE SAY FINLAND?
Ethan Baker
While we're creating a nanny state, I want to ban you from cuck porn as I deem it damaging to your health. Oh, you don't like censorship when it's turned your way, do you?
Ryder Cox
BTFO
Levi Cruz
...
Christian Barnes
Back to Holla Forums you stupid faggot
Jace Morales
But you have no authority in anything other than being a pathetic faggot?
Camden Edwards
Seems I touched a nerve.
Chase Anderson
I cannot wait to mine your salt on Tuesday, it's going to be glorious.
Hunter Martinez
FBI exit nodes.
Brody Green
tl;dr what's the big deal there?
Henry Foster
So what? As long as there are some non-FBI nodes, your address is not visible, and HTTPS will protect from getting the traffic.
James Butler
How do you verify which one is not honey-pot?
Owen Turner
Honey pots work by attracting people to go visit it. Tor nodes don't attract anybody. They just randomly choose nodes to go through.
Eli Smith
one of the founders of WoT tweeted this.
Caleb Adams
Does anyone here use wot? I installed it back then when it was new, maybe in 2007/08 or something like that and used it for less than a year. Totally useless shit that only ever warns from the most obvious bullshit and sometimes even marks normal websites as bad like torrents sites.
Thomas Richardson
Literally ==WHY?== Are people too lazy to evaluate a website's safety nowadays? A web of trust for websites is stupid.
As an alternative, just use these extensions :^)
But really though, Why use WOT? Just use noscript.
Tyler Rivera
...
Adam Hill
seems your nerves have been touched
Chase Hall
Half of that shit is unnecessary, I would have: Maybe some adblocker, not really necessary with umatrix. Didn't know about Pure URL or Decentraleyes, both seem useful.
Jaxon Taylor
not that dude but i have no idea how to use umatrix
Leo Torres
When you go to a web page, the web page will make references to load images, javascript programs, css styling, plugins, and more. Well sometimes, the web page will load references that aren't on the same domain as the web page. For example, if you go to funnyjunk.com, it will make references to fjcdn.com, google.com, lijit.com, google-analytics.com.
The purpose of umatrix is to be a firewall where the user can control whether to permit the web page to (temporarily) load different kinds of references. By default, only first party references are allowed. There is also a list of blacklisted items that are active by default so your web page won't load references to the blacklisted items.
Hudson Russell
Exactly the same as you use NoScript, just with more granularity. Instead of enabling scripts from a single site, you can enable different aspects from different domains. If you want to enable everything from a domain, just click the domain and it will highlight green (enabled) everything from that domain, except things that are blacklisted somewhere else. Numbers are the amount of things of that type that domain offers, for example 15 images, or 10 scripts. The rules then follow from this: Light green/red means it was allowed/disallowed indirectly by some rule. Strong green/red means you want to allow/disallow that group, and if rules overlap it will follow the strongest one.
Carter Jones
wow umatrix is nice and intuitive. noscript had a script lookup feature (middleclick) but it was rarely useful.
opinions on xmlhtmlreqs? some don't seem to be needed for 8ch functionality. nor does the softserve.* script (am i being anti-ethical towards a site i love?) is the browser fingerprint concept a psyop to get sheep to use tbb with noscript and httpseverywhere?
