5 ms·

For website of a purist software freedom company I was surprised to see Privacy Badger show up with a red 5: ajax.googleapis.com fonts.googleapis.com secure.gr

by guaka 9y ago

For website of a purist software freedom company I was surprised to see Privacy Badger show up with a red 5: ajax.googleapis.com fonts.googleapis.com secure.gravatar.com fonts.gstatic.com code.jquery.com

belorn 9y ago
Can someone explain why you would want to link to fonts/js libraries rather than have a copy on the server and server that yourself?
- askvictor 9y ago
  One reason would be that the browser will cache them if they are used in multiple sites, so loading will be much faster on subsequent sites using the same resources. Another might be that such resources load faster off a CDN than your own server.
  - nilved 9y ago
    In practice, this never happens. The value is certainly less than the data you're selling about your users to Google.
    - askvictor 9y ago
      What data are you giving to Google (or another CDN) by loading jQuery or a font from them? What does the ToS say? Genuine question. Edit: here's the ToS: https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/terms https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/terms If you believe Google, they're not collecting anything.
      - nilved 9y ago
        Don't be naive.
    - skj 9y ago
      Value to whom? The site loads faster (so people like it slightly better), it's easier to maintain (less files to serve and keep track of), all for the cost of something the site owners didn't pay for in the first place.
      - throw2016 9y ago
        This is often repeated but without any data to back it up its a bit of a myth. My tests show local resources consistently loading faster than making a link to Google. These are supposed to be cached but thing like fonts are always loaded again. Anyone can repeat this for themselves.
        pgeorgi 9y ago
        > Anyone can repeat this for themselves. I tried, they came from the disk cache.
annabellish 9y ago
What's wrong with any of those things?
- yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
  Libraries are probably fine, but pulling them from Google means that Google can track you
  - homero 9y ago
    Probably but those domains are meant to be cookie less for speed
    - nerdponx 9y ago
      They still know which IP address is loading it. And I do often see cookies on CDNs in uBlock Matrix.
  - samirillian 9y ago
    Don't know how I never put this together. Good (cynical) explanation for Google fonts.
    - Crontab 9y ago
      Don’t mistake their generosity for generosity.
    - Drdrdrq 9y ago
      This is not cynical, it's realistic. After all, tracking users is closely tied to their main source of income. It is not a coincidence that most pages use Google Analytics.
earenndil 9y ago
Use decentraleyes!
- n1000 9y ago
  https://decentraleyes.org/ https://decentraleyes.org/ > Protects you against tracking through "free", centralized, content delivery. It prevents a lot of requests from reaching networks like Google Hosted Libraries, and serves local files to keep sites from breaking. Complements regular content blockers.

by guaka 9y ago

belorn 9y ago

Can someone explain why you would want to link to fonts/js libraries rather than have a copy on the server and server that yourself?

askvictor 9y ago
One reason would be that the browser will cache them if they are used in multiple sites, so loading will be much faster on subsequent sites using the same resources. Another might be that such resources load faster off a CDN than your own server.
- nilved 9y ago
  In practice, this never happens. The value is certainly less than the data you're selling about your users to Google.
  - askvictor 9y ago
    What data are you giving to Google (or another CDN) by loading jQuery or a font from them? What does the ToS say? Genuine question. Edit: here's the ToS: https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/terms https://developers.google.com/speed/libraries/terms If you believe Google, they're not collecting anything.
    - nilved 9y ago
      Don't be naive.
  - skj 9y ago
    Value to whom? The site loads faster (so people like it slightly better), it's easier to maintain (less files to serve and keep track of), all for the cost of something the site owners didn't pay for in the first place.
    - throw2016 9y ago
      This is often repeated but without any data to back it up its a bit of a myth. My tests show local resources consistently loading faster than making a link to Google. These are supposed to be cached but thing like fonts are always loaded again. Anyone can repeat this for themselves.
      - pgeorgi 9y ago
        > Anyone can repeat this for themselves. I tried, they came from the disk cache.

annabellish 9y ago

What's wrong with any of those things?

yjftsjthsd-h 9y ago
Libraries are probably fine, but pulling them from Google means that Google can track you
- homero 9y ago
  Probably but those domains are meant to be cookie less for speed
  - nerdponx 9y ago
    They still know which IP address is loading it. And I do often see cookies on CDNs in uBlock Matrix.
- samirillian 9y ago
  Don't know how I never put this together. Good (cynical) explanation for Google fonts.
  - Crontab 9y ago
    Don’t mistake their generosity for generosity.
  - Drdrdrq 9y ago
    This is not cynical, it's realistic. After all, tracking users is closely tied to their main source of income. It is not a coincidence that most pages use Google Analytics.

earenndil 9y ago

Use decentraleyes!

n1000 9y ago
https://decentraleyes.org/ https://decentraleyes.org/ > Protects you against tracking through "free", centralized, content delivery. It prevents a lot of requests from reaching networks like Google Hosted Libraries, and serves local files to keep sites from breaking. Complements regular content blockers.