5 ms·
I agree I wish they had more detail about the exceptions. I've been a FPI user for years as a best-effort to reign in tracking but there are a common few sites
by Caligatio 6y ago
I agree I wish they had more detail about the exceptions.
I've been a FPI user for years as a best-effort to reign in tracking but there are a common few sites that just break with FPI (50% of the time PayPal checkout doesn't work). Even if "Total Cookie Protection" is only 98% as effective as FPI, I'm making the switch.
EDIT: FPI = first-party isolation
- johannh 6y agoYes, it’s essentially that, FPI with workarounds for common breakage. You should switch from FPI, this is essentially another take on FPI by some of its original developers, so it should have fewer issues overall, not just site breakage.
- lentil_soup 6y agoFPI?
- iruoy 6y agoFirst-Party Isolation https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/firefox-fpi.html https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/firefox-fpi.html
- mrweasel 6y agoIt will be interesting to see how many sites break with “Total Cookie Protection”. Currently I use what I consider are bare minimum of anti-tracking, that is what I can make Firefox provide on its own, plus the DuckDuckGo browser extention. Those two things alone break an alarming number of sites. The DDG extention is pretty regularly mistaken for an ad-blocker. Given Firefoxs low adoption, I fear that website owner will just ignore that their excessive tracking breaks their site in Firefox... “Works in Chrome... good enough”
- kiwijamo 6y agoI have strict tracking enabled in Firefox as well as uBlock Origin and I've yet to see a site broken. The only "broken" ones I've seen are badly coded ones that also fail to work in Chrome. Reputable sites tend to be just fine. YMMV.
- ficklepickle 6y agoFF blocked fingerprinting by visa during a transaction. To my surprise, even that did not break.