4 ms·
> Without fail, the websites detected the intrusion attempt and prevented access to the content Using incognito mode in the browser to make it a bit harder to
by FabHK 7y ago
> Without fail, the websites detected the intrusion attempt and prevented access to the content
Using incognito mode in the browser to make it a bit harder to be tracked (without even blocking ads!) is "an intrusion attempt"? Excuse me? That's absurd language.
- edoceo 7y agoRight, because you're "intruding" where you're not supposed to. It's hyperbolic but not wholly inaccurate. Gotta get clicks!
- jhall1468 7y agoI would argue they are intruding in that they are accessing information from my browser that they shouldn't have access to. If their website allows me to read an article they don't want me to by going to "www.nytimes.com" that's not an intrusion, that's poor gating on their part.
- testvox 7y agoCouldn't you say the same thing about any security hole? If Equifax didn't want people reading their databases then they shouldn't have allowed anyone with an internet connection to remotely execute code on their systems via https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/issues/8064 https://github.com/rapid7/metasploit-framework/issues/8064
- jhall1468 7y agoThere's an enormous difference between accessing a public endpoint, and accessing one that isn't intended to be public. To use addresses as an analogy: Going to www.nytimes.com is roughly the equivalent to driving in front of someones house. It's certainly not my fault if they leave their blinds open while they are naked. Now maybe they thought I was someone else due to the car I drove, but that sure as shit isn't my problem. Equifax is an entirely different issue. If you leave the door open to your house, that sure as hell doesn't give me the right to go into it. I can look at it, I can even tell everyone "Hey, that door is wide open." But I can't go in do shit without permission to be there.
- amelius 7y agoThe author was deliberately trying to use incognito mode to view the paywalled content, so this is imho rightfully called an intrusion attempt. Of course, if you're just using incognito mode normally and happened to visit the same page, then it is not an intrusion attempt but just incognito browsing. The whole point is that news websites can't distinguish between the two.
- JustSomeNobody 7y agoI wonder if he broke the CFA in doing so. Trying to access a computer in order to commit an act to defraud or some such nonsense.
- raverbashing 7y agoSo is their server intruding onto my computer when they set cookies without my permission?
- FabHK 7y agoI am deliberately using incognito by default (eg now), and if websites don't want to give me their content without tracking me then they should properly paywall their content and ask me to log in - then we both understand what's going on. Frankly, considering this an intrusion attempt reveals a crazy, completely warped mindset: "We will track you, we want to know exactly who you are and what you read and how long, and if you attempt to evade this surveillance, you are an intruder!" I use unique emails when signing up for websites - is that intrusion, too?
- basch 7y agoI would think incognito would make it easier to track, if your session persists until you close incognito. Youd be much better off with umatrix blocking cookies and javascript.
- Dylan16807 7y agoIt's equivalent to wiping your cookies. Going to a blank slate is definitely not an intrusion attempt.
- WalterSear 7y agoIt's the language of someone married to a business model. The publishers can't exist without search engine indexing and user tracking, but can't make money without paywalling. We have the technology to subsidize media creation appropriately, in the manner of performance royalties organizations. However, since there's no equivalent of radio station middlemen, it's not a problem that can be solved by an unregulated market.