Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Just another anecdote to "ad" to the pile:

In an effort to keep my Chromium/FF instances 'clean' I just use https-everywhere and uMatrix (since it came out - my trust in noscript and abp was waning a long way back). It's nice to block the vast majority of low-hanging trackers. I'm hoping that having FB, GA and myriad other tracking scripts auto-disabled circumvents some of their even smarter tracking methods (IP, cookie) but I'm always open to modify the setup, just not at the expense of my limited computing resources.

Using 10 privacy extensions is a non-starter, for instance. Not to mention how little I trust most of the ad blocking efforts out there.

At home I have a pi-hole set up (as well as the pi being a media centre, IRC, IM and NAS... so versatile!) to block the low-hanging scripts and calls on my family and guests' browsing. It's a shame it blocks Piwik by default, but I can understand the reasoning. Log-based analytics really should be the norm, anyway. The speed boost is non-trivial, as is the peace of mind that most of our private life is not being sold to the highest bidder.

EDIT: I've just gone into the Privacy settings in uMatrix and checked everything on the basis of this post-as-reminder: Cookies, local storage, user agent, strict https... Don't think the last one allows me to drop https-everywhere yet though, only to avoid mixed content. I may end up unchecking that box if it gets too annoying... I know the risks!



As a NoScript user I'm curious what eroded your trust in it. Should I be looking at switching away from it for some reason?


Nothing major, beyond the controversies listed here[0] and the developer's more cavalier approach to whitelisting. Plus resource usage was double what was on offer by the much more fine-grained uMatrix. At the time at least. Maybe still.

The Tor project still bundle NS in with their browser, hardened, I believe (stricter whitelisting, for one) but they clearly still trust it. Better than nothing, but far from perfect IMO.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoScript#Controversies


As far as I know, there was a single incident where a version of NoScript put its own site on the user's AdBlock Plus whitelist. Other than that, NoScript has not done anything shady and continues to provide features that have no equivalent in any other browser or extension.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: