4 ms·

I tried some sites I thought might get a high score. Mostly news sites and webstores since they like to know a lot about you. Fox News [1] and Breitbart [2] go

by iruoy 6y ago

I tried some sites I thought might get a high score. Mostly news sites and webstores since they like to know a lot about you. Fox News [1] and Breitbart [2] got scarily high scores [1] https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=foxnews.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=foxnews.com [2] https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=breitbart.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=breitbart.com

tyingq 6y ago
61 third party cookies and 29 trackers for foxnews. Wow.
- kube-system 6y ago
  https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nypost.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nypost.com 40 trackers, 65 third-party cookies https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=aljazeera.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=aljazeera.com 54 trackers, 148 third-party cookies https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=theonion.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=theonion.com 1 tracker, 0 third-party cookies
  - tyingq 6y ago
    https://gtmetrix.com/reports/nypost.com/vXp79Q5S https://gtmetrix.com/reports/nypost.com/vXp79Q5S 24 seconds to load, 585 individual http requests. Crazy. You would think someone there would raise this as an issue.
ceejayoz 6y ago
Be sure to load the "This website loads trackers on your computer that are designed to evade third-party cookie blockers." section's details and see the fingerprinting images that are used. Crazy stuff.
ziml77 6y ago
First one I tried was https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nytimes.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nytimes.com 12 trackers and 6 third-party cookies I'm surprised that they're not bad with tracking given how bad news sites tend to be. I thought maybe it could be explained by them being a paid site, but the WSJ is too and their analysis was abysmal with 32 trackers, 53 third-party cookies, fingerprinting, and session recording.
- clairity 6y ago
  > "12 trackers and 6 third-party cookies ... they're not bad ..." that's still bad, and nytimes uses a bunch of first-party tracking as well. it's just not as bad as the worst ones, but in no way should you excuse them for their own bad behavior.

by iruoy 6y ago

tyingq 6y ago

61 third party cookies and 29 trackers for foxnews. Wow.

kube-system 6y ago
https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nypost.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nypost.com 40 trackers, 65 third-party cookies https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=aljazeera.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=aljazeera.com 54 trackers, 148 third-party cookies https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=theonion.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=theonion.com 1 tracker, 0 third-party cookies
- tyingq 6y ago
  https://gtmetrix.com/reports/nypost.com/vXp79Q5S https://gtmetrix.com/reports/nypost.com/vXp79Q5S 24 seconds to load, 585 individual http requests. Crazy. You would think someone there would raise this as an issue.

ceejayoz 6y ago

Be sure to load the "This website loads trackers on your computer that are designed to evade third-party cookie blockers." section's details and see the fingerprinting images that are used. Crazy stuff.

ziml77 6y ago

First one I tried was https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nytimes.com https://themarkup.org/blacklight/?url=nytimes.com 12 trackers and 6 third-party cookies I'm surprised that they're not bad with tracking given how bad news sites tend to be. I thought maybe it could be explained by them being a paid site, but the WSJ is too and their analysis was abysmal with 32 trackers, 53 third-party cookies, fingerprinting, and session recording.

clairity 6y ago
> "12 trackers and 6 third-party cookies ... they're not bad ..." that's still bad, and nytimes uses a bunch of first-party tracking as well. it's just not as bad as the worst ones, but in no way should you excuse them for their own bad behavior.