4 ms·
It's not that one site is seeing another site. It's that multiple sites will serve content (ads, Javascript libraries, like buttons) from a common site (eg an
by Renaud 4y ago
It's not that one site is seeing another site.
It's that multiple sites will serve content (ads, Javascript libraries, like buttons) from a common site (eg an ad network) that uses its own domain.
That domain is allowed to get the cookie for itself because it is referenced by multiple site, that's how this type of tracking works.
If you go to bbc.com, it still won't be able to see cookies from cnn.com, but say if advert.com is included by both sites, then it will see that you visited them both.
That's the power and great danger that things like facebook and google sense represent.
The owner of the sites get some stats for free by using these services, but the biggest benefit is for google and facebook to be able to track what users are looking at accross the web. And you just need to be identifiable on one site that you visit (say, FB or gmail) for them to know exactly who you are.
From what I understand, Firefox will only allow advert.com to get the cookie it created when being loaded as part of bbc.com, but it won't be able to read its own cookie from cnn.com, it will have to create a new, separate one, thus breaking the link tracking you between sites, or at least making it harder to connect the dots.
Everyone should use FF.
- Sohcahtoa82 4y ago> Everyone should use FF. Wouldn't simply installing an ad/tracking blocker like uBlock Origin be just as effective, if not moreso?
- robin_reala 4y agouBlock Origin works best on Firefox anyway: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-b...
- johannes1234321 4y agoIsn't it better to remove the different root problems isntead of having plugins working around?
- Sohcahtoa82 4y agoPersonally, I use uBlock Origin more to block obnoxious ads than to block the tracking. I'm not sure I really care that much about tracking, honestly. So what if reddit knows I bought a toaster on Amazon recently? What are they going to do with that data, show me toaster ads? I'm going to be blocking that ad. Sell the fact that I bought a toaster? Whatever. It's all going to be so advertisers can personalize ads...which I will be blocking.
- cpmsmith 4y agoThere's some overlap, but ads aren't the only thing using this. Google Fonts is the classic example of something that does add value (nice fonts) to a webpage, and as such isn't blocked by most adblockers (including uBO) by default, but is still able to use this for tracking because the same domain serves the font files on every website using them.
- taftster 4y agoVery insightful response. The tendency is to look at the cookie problem as an advertising problem. Whereas, there are other cross-origin use cases that are not adverts but pose the same tracking threat. Anything on a CDN (like common javascript libraries) share this trait.
- titusjohnson 4y agoNot with Google hamstringing extensions w/ Manifest v3, no.
- soundnote 4y agoThankfully we have Brave (and I think Vivaldi too). When the blocker isn't an extension, Manifest v3 doesn't matter much. Brave does CNAME uncloaking too, even though Chromium doesn't provide an extension API for it the way Firefox does.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ghusto 4y agoThanks man! I misunderstood the whole thing!