6 ms·

I understand these metrics are easy to capture, but only if the browser / device makes it accessible via APIs. How difficult would it be to notify users (like G

I understand these metrics are easy to capture, but only if the browser / device makes it accessible via APIs. How difficult would it be to notify users (like GPS use, or Notifications on a phone) that X information is also being captured and allow for an opt-in? It's not trivial as obviously applications need to know at some level where users are clicking / tapping to function, but does the device need to share that with the code being executed and/or can it hide that layer? I'd pay good money (or pay money to support) a browser that did this well on mobile / desktop. (Tails browser has similar prompts for this kind of thing) Admittedly, I am not well versed in the lower-level workings of the browser, so this may be a stupid thing to ask for.

Raphmedia 8y ago
How would the browser know which to block? `onClick(){fetchAllForumTopics();}` vs `onClick(){sendTrackingData();}`. Both are simple ajax calls. Even if you somehow managed to know which calls to block, you could simply hack it by calling a jpg with extra parameters and then have the server save those: `onClick(){body.css({backgroundImage: 'http :// mysite.com/ images/ logo.png?x=123&y=512&elementName=BankAccountNumber'});}`
- notyourwork 8y ago
  Even ignoring that knowing where you click is as simple as knowing what feature you use. If you login then I know you clicked login, if you perform a search then I know you clicked on the search input. Usage of an element tells you where a user clicks. It misses things like clicking on whitespace or where your cursor traverses.
  - sailfast 8y ago
    Right - that wouldn't be a perfect privacy solution but it would likely prevent significant biometric data gathering and not be too huge a burden on users / adoption.
- sailfast 8y ago
  I wasn't thinking of blocking specific function calls so much as that data not being available to the browser at all to send in the first place, providing the ability to selectively block mouse x,y coordinates tracking, etc before the code on the page was executed. Again, this may not be possible without breaking the web given the structure of the browser and what pages need to render at a low level. Perhaps client-side middleware that only passes user data when an action is performed rather than constantly streaming coordinate and interaction data all the time?
  - Kalium 8y ago
    This is a great idea! It's always a good idea to control carefully what information is available to a system you might not always be able to trust completely. It's especially important to be sure you're not leaking info through a channel you didn't consider, which at times means that an allowlisting approach is preferable to a blocklisting approach. Your heart is in the right place. Keep iterating!
- CuriousSkeptic 8y ago
  I’m thinking broadcast models of publication is inherently less privacy invasive. So a browser only functioning over a federated content addressable web fetching content from trusted cache nodes could help isolate the problem to only vet information intentionally meant to be communicated leaving pure consumption reasonably private.
chapium 8y ago
I for one, prefer not to be harassed by popups all day. What you propose is EU check for cookies, EU check for privacy statement, GPS check accelerometer check, keyboard check? Ok, now we are getting a little ridiculous. If keyboard usage can be checked, that would be a warning for nearly every website. This reminds me of the app usage warnings on Android, which request access for every phone function. Or in California, the "Known to the state of California to cause cancer" notices that are in literally every restaurant. When everything has a warning sign on it, nothing does. Opt-in just trains the user to ignore all of the prompts. A better solution in my opinion, would be to improve browser security and don't allow these APIs to be exploited beyond narrow use cases. In the interim, extensions could be used to reduce the effectiveness of all manner of data collecting. There also is something to be said about user habits. For example, some websites are very intrusive with ads. My solution? I don't visit that site and find the information elsewhere. This is where extensions or browser features would be great. What if we created a privacy index on each site? Then the user could choose whether a visit to that site is necessary.
- sailfast 8y ago
  What I am asking for above was precisely what you suggest, a way to prevent the browser from making those APIs available for significant tracking purposes. Initially this might be "hey do you want to share your finger motions / accelerometer with this app" and I'd be OK with a number of pop-ups on first app open, but I'm a customer, not an app developer so I don't really care about the impact on adoption - I care about the privacy.
tinus_hn 8y ago
You can’t easily block this without blocking a lot of legitimate behavior like rollover menus.

Raphmedia 8y ago

How would the browser know which to block? `onClick(){fetchAllForumTopics();}` vs `onClick(){sendTrackingData();}`. Both are simple ajax calls. Even if you somehow managed to know which calls to block, you could simply hack it by calling a jpg with extra parameters and then have the server save those: `onClick(){body.css({backgroundImage: 'http :// mysite.com/ images/ logo.png?x=123&y=512&elementName=BankAccountNumber'});}`

notyourwork 8y ago
Even ignoring that knowing where you click is as simple as knowing what feature you use. If you login then I know you clicked login, if you perform a search then I know you clicked on the search input. Usage of an element tells you where a user clicks. It misses things like clicking on whitespace or where your cursor traverses.
- sailfast 8y ago
  Right - that wouldn't be a perfect privacy solution but it would likely prevent significant biometric data gathering and not be too huge a burden on users / adoption.
sailfast 8y ago
I wasn't thinking of blocking specific function calls so much as that data not being available to the browser at all to send in the first place, providing the ability to selectively block mouse x,y coordinates tracking, etc before the code on the page was executed. Again, this may not be possible without breaking the web given the structure of the browser and what pages need to render at a low level. Perhaps client-side middleware that only passes user data when an action is performed rather than constantly streaming coordinate and interaction data all the time?
- Kalium 8y ago
  This is a great idea! It's always a good idea to control carefully what information is available to a system you might not always be able to trust completely. It's especially important to be sure you're not leaking info through a channel you didn't consider, which at times means that an allowlisting approach is preferable to a blocklisting approach. Your heart is in the right place. Keep iterating!
CuriousSkeptic 8y ago
I’m thinking broadcast models of publication is inherently less privacy invasive. So a browser only functioning over a federated content addressable web fetching content from trusted cache nodes could help isolate the problem to only vet information intentionally meant to be communicated leaving pure consumption reasonably private.

chapium 8y ago

I for one, prefer not to be harassed by popups all day. What you propose is EU check for cookies, EU check for privacy statement, GPS check accelerometer check, keyboard check? Ok, now we are getting a little ridiculous. If keyboard usage can be checked, that would be a warning for nearly every website. This reminds me of the app usage warnings on Android, which request access for every phone function. Or in California, the "Known to the state of California to cause cancer" notices that are in literally every restaurant. When everything has a warning sign on it, nothing does. Opt-in just trains the user to ignore all of the prompts. A better solution in my opinion, would be to improve browser security and don't allow these APIs to be exploited beyond narrow use cases. In the interim, extensions could be used to reduce the effectiveness of all manner of data collecting. There also is something to be said about user habits. For example, some websites are very intrusive with ads. My solution? I don't visit that site and find the information elsewhere. This is where extensions or browser features would be great. What if we created a privacy index on each site? Then the user could choose whether a visit to that site is necessary.

sailfast 8y ago
What I am asking for above was precisely what you suggest, a way to prevent the browser from making those APIs available for significant tracking purposes. Initially this might be "hey do you want to share your finger motions / accelerometer with this app" and I'd be OK with a number of pop-ups on first app open, but I'm a customer, not an app developer so I don't really care about the impact on adoption - I care about the privacy.

tinus_hn 8y ago

You can’t easily block this without blocking a lot of legitimate behavior like rollover menus.