4 ms·

You can't advertise as a "private browser" an get away with that PR bullshit. "Anonymous" usage data is anything but when the server receiving it can easily tel

You can't advertise as a "private browser" an get away with that PR bullshit. "Anonymous" usage data is anything but when the server receiving it can easily tell who it's coming from. Mozilla is not the user, it breaks the entire idea of privacy.

yeukhon 9y ago
As people below have already added their comments, I just want to give my two cents. This is not PR bullshit, but the Focus team can consider asking users on first run. This private browser, having been using it since beta on iOS, is nothing more than just a private browsing window like the one offered in Desktop version (I am not here to debate the technical implementation since I do not know). Telemetry does not break privacy. Privacy is a contract between the user and the product creator. In this case, Mozilla offers opt-out and does its best effort to document. User has the right to opt out or even choose not to use the software. To me, this is a positive user feedback, but not some PR bullshit (frustration I get it). When someone says your session is private under TLS, well, your IP and user-agent are almost guaranteed captured in server logs, but you can choose to believe/not believe the service provider promises in the respective ToS.
- dheera 9y ago
  Part of the problem is when Mozilla gives data to Google, there is no way of knowing what Google does with it. If you want to trust Mozilla AND Google AND trust that no gag orders have been issued to the above companies by the NSA, CIA, FBI et al, fine. That's the way 99% of apps work. They all have privacy policies, and people generally trust them. The whole point of explicitly "private" or "anonymous" software is that there are a bunch of users that do NOT trust the above. Calling your software "private browsing software" and then having Google-anything embedded in it is like serving vegetables cooked in chicken broth and calling your dish "vegetarian". Although 90% of the population will gladly eat your chicken broth, it's disingenuous to sell it to actual vegetarians.
  - jjrrmm 9y ago
    very good analogy. thanks :)
  - BHSPitMonkey 9y ago
    Well, the browsing is private. The way you obtain and use the browser isn't necessarily. It's an important distinction, though it's certainly still enough to be a dealbreaker for some.
    - st3fan 9y ago
      You can also download the APK directly from the github repo or fdroid if you don’t want to use the play store.
  - mintplant 9y ago
    As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the Google SDK is only used to record whether the app was installed by way of an ad campaign Mozilla is running on Google. All other telemetry data goes directly to Mozilla servers, and contains things like "feature X was used"—not browsing data. Since it's all free software, you can check what events are actually sent here: https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/blob/master/app/src/main/java/org/mozilla/focus/telemetry/TelemetryWrapper.java https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/blob/master/...
    - st3fan 9y ago
      That is not actually what I said. The only component we use for campaign tracking is Adjust which has nothing to do with google services. Adjust has gone through a very tough vetting process.
      - mintplant 9y ago
        Better to quote you directly: > - Adjust SDK: an install attribution tool (aka install referrer tracking). This is only used to determine whether the app was installed as the result of a specific (google-hosted) ad campaign. Adjust depends on play-services-analytics. ( https://www.adjust.com/glossary/install-referrer/ https://www.adjust.com/glossary/install-referrer/ ). play-services-analytics is what I meant by "the Google SDK" in question; sorry if that was unclear!
- bjkiguilbjkl 9y ago
  >Telemetry does not break privacy. [...] User has the right to [...] choose not to use the software. So, every software is the pinnacle of privacy, right? After all, you don't have to use them... Idiot.
calimac 9y ago
Absolutely correct jasonkostempski. YouTube search any martech data analytics talk to prove the "anonymous" is anything but. That anonymous I'd is ran through 15 data streams and linked back to your primary id. That's the only way the figured out the multi device single user analytics.
eli 9y ago
If you don't trust Mozilla, you shouldn't use their browser at all regardless of what packages it imports. I think you're being a little silly though.
- gcb0 9y ago
  you can say that about Google, but never of a open source project. people have minimal ownership of code and time they contributed. they should not allow people to screw the project over without being vocal. its like someone invading your home, breaking everything, and people just telling you "if you don't like it just move elsewhere".
- jasonkostempski 9y ago
  I don't have to trust them if the code is open source and it doesn't send any data back to them or anyone else unless I explicitly allow it. I will try this browser and I will turn off telemetry, just like I do with Firefox. What makes me angry is why call it a "private browser" and not take it all the way? You can accomplish everything this browser does with Firefox except you have to configure it, why leave this one last thing enabled by default? I know no one at Mozilla really thinks "you can trust us" is a valid claim in the privacy game so something else is up, probably not a conspiracy, but at the very least, the wrong people are making some calls.

yeukhon 9y ago

As people below have already added their comments, I just want to give my two cents. This is not PR bullshit, but the Focus team can consider asking users on first run. This private browser, having been using it since beta on iOS, is nothing more than just a private browsing window like the one offered in Desktop version (I am not here to debate the technical implementation since I do not know). Telemetry does not break privacy. Privacy is a contract between the user and the product creator. In this case, Mozilla offers opt-out and does its best effort to document. User has the right to opt out or even choose not to use the software. To me, this is a positive user feedback, but not some PR bullshit (frustration I get it). When someone says your session is private under TLS, well, your IP and user-agent are almost guaranteed captured in server logs, but you can choose to believe/not believe the service provider promises in the respective ToS.

dheera 9y ago
Part of the problem is when Mozilla gives data to Google, there is no way of knowing what Google does with it. If you want to trust Mozilla AND Google AND trust that no gag orders have been issued to the above companies by the NSA, CIA, FBI et al, fine. That's the way 99% of apps work. They all have privacy policies, and people generally trust them. The whole point of explicitly "private" or "anonymous" software is that there are a bunch of users that do NOT trust the above. Calling your software "private browsing software" and then having Google-anything embedded in it is like serving vegetables cooked in chicken broth and calling your dish "vegetarian". Although 90% of the population will gladly eat your chicken broth, it's disingenuous to sell it to actual vegetarians.
- jjrrmm 9y ago
  very good analogy. thanks :)
- BHSPitMonkey 9y ago
  Well, the browsing is private. The way you obtain and use the browser isn't necessarily. It's an important distinction, though it's certainly still enough to be a dealbreaker for some.
  - st3fan 9y ago
    You can also download the APK directly from the github repo or fdroid if you don’t want to use the play store.
- mintplant 9y ago
  As mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the Google SDK is only used to record whether the app was installed by way of an ad campaign Mozilla is running on Google. All other telemetry data goes directly to Mozilla servers, and contains things like "feature X was used"—not browsing data. Since it's all free software, you can check what events are actually sent here: https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/blob/master/app/src/main/java/org/mozilla/focus/telemetry/TelemetryWrapper.java https://github.com/mozilla-mobile/focus-android/blob/master/...
  - st3fan 9y ago
    That is not actually what I said. The only component we use for campaign tracking is Adjust which has nothing to do with google services. Adjust has gone through a very tough vetting process.
    - mintplant 9y ago
      Better to quote you directly: > - Adjust SDK: an install attribution tool (aka install referrer tracking). This is only used to determine whether the app was installed as the result of a specific (google-hosted) ad campaign. Adjust depends on play-services-analytics. ( https://www.adjust.com/glossary/install-referrer/ https://www.adjust.com/glossary/install-referrer/ ). play-services-analytics is what I meant by "the Google SDK" in question; sorry if that was unclear!
bjkiguilbjkl 9y ago
>Telemetry does not break privacy. [...] User has the right to [...] choose not to use the software. So, every software is the pinnacle of privacy, right? After all, you don't have to use them... Idiot.

calimac 9y ago

Absolutely correct jasonkostempski. YouTube search any martech data analytics talk to prove the "anonymous" is anything but. That anonymous I'd is ran through 15 data streams and linked back to your primary id. That's the only way the figured out the multi device single user analytics.

eli 9y ago

If you don't trust Mozilla, you shouldn't use their browser at all regardless of what packages it imports. I think you're being a little silly though.

gcb0 9y ago
you can say that about Google, but never of a open source project. people have minimal ownership of code and time they contributed. they should not allow people to screw the project over without being vocal. its like someone invading your home, breaking everything, and people just telling you "if you don't like it just move elsewhere".
jasonkostempski 9y ago
I don't have to trust them if the code is open source and it doesn't send any data back to them or anyone else unless I explicitly allow it. I will try this browser and I will turn off telemetry, just like I do with Firefox. What makes me angry is why call it a "private browser" and not take it all the way? You can accomplish everything this browser does with Firefox except you have to configure it, why leave this one last thing enabled by default? I know no one at Mozilla really thinks "you can trust us" is a valid claim in the privacy game so something else is up, probably not a conspiracy, but at the very least, the wrong people are making some calls.