14 ms·

Fork of the popular “I don't care about cookies” extension

262 points by bj-rn 4y ago

salcapolupo 4y ago
leslielurker 4y ago
I was never clear on this extension. Does it just suppress the the cookie prompts, does it only accept essential cookies or does it do the default action and accept everything?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fourmajor 4y ago
  From their Chrome web store page (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-cookies/fihnjjcciajhdojfnbdddfaoknhalnja https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-...) > In most cases, it just blocks or hides cookie related pop-ups. When it's needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what's easier to do). It doesn't delete cookies.
- uwuemu 4y ago
  I mean... if you don't care about cookies (as is the extension's name)... you don't care about cookies. Asking what happens to them is missing the point.
  - josefx 4y ago
    On the other hand if someone offers you a cookie for a dollar and you say "I don't care about cookies" you now owe them a dollar.
- LordHeini 4y ago
  If implemented correctly clicking "Accept" on a cookie banner will trigger the loading of the tracking scripts. Which will then set its cookies. At least that is how i implement google analytics for example. By not showing the button in the first place, nothing happens and no cookies are set (apart from the functional ones which are set regardless). Other than that it really does not matter that much because if you use a plugin like this you will usually use an add blocker as well which removes the tracking.
xuhu 4y ago
It would be awesome if Avast moved the extension source code to Github or somewhere else public. I hope existing users won't settle blindly for whatever changes get added from now on.
anilshanbhag 4y ago
This is a manifest V2 extension. Unless someone converts it to V3, it will stop working end of this year.
- klondike_ 4y ago
  Not a problem on Firefox and its derivatives
- bj-rn 4y ago
  They are working on that: https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/pull/9 https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/pull/9
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- ravenstine 4y ago
  Does anyone know if Brave will still support v2?
  - yyyk2 4y ago
    It's based on Chromium, so no.
    - gnicholas 4y ago
      Is it that simple? Brave has various proprietary bits, so it's possible they could maintain v2 support. Perhaps others know if this is feasible, from a technical perspective.
      - ThunderSizzle 4y ago
        Until a chromium browser let's you use arbitrary extension stores, I don't think there's any fork that's divergent enough. And I haven't found one after months of searching. I'm almost to the point of trying to do it myself.
    - 4y ago
echelon 4y ago
Stop using / enabling Chrome and its derivatives. Any use of that codebase - Brave, etc. - empowers Google. They're the ones pushing it forward, and developer mindshare empowers the player holding the reins. Firefox or broke.
- wartijn_ 4y ago
  The original version of this add-on is available on Firefox and getting this fork on Firefox is on the to do list[0] [0] https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/issues/7 https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/issues...
- ThunderSizzle 4y ago
  - jraph 4y ago
    > Firefox also wants to deplatform me and nearly half my country. What does this mean?
    - geraldwhen 4y ago
    - the_third_wave 4y ago
      I assume it is related to the following, written by Mozilla's activist-CEO: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplat... In this piece she takes a clearly partisan stance with regard to "Trump" (between quotes because the stance is against the "movement", not the person) and calls for censorship - disguised under vague terms like Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation. No matter whether you agree with Baker or not it should be clear that a pro-censorship stance coming from the head of a browser company is a bad sign. I'm a die-hard Firefox user and not a resident of the D.S.A. but that does not mean I won't be affected by this type of activism. If Baker and her ilk go beyond their current promotional activism - from pride-month themes to "voices of colour" extension suggestions - to actually embrace the censorship she seems to desire I'll jump ship. Not to Chrome or Safari or anything like that, probably to one of the de-fanged Blink-based browsers like Bromite or Ungoogled Chromium.
est31 4y ago
FTR, Firefox is working on supporting this natively: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1783015 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1783015 According to this german article: https://www.soeren-hentzschel.at/firefox/firefox-sagt-cookie-dialogen-den-kampf-an/ https://www.soeren-hentzschel.at/firefox/firefox-sagt-cookie... , you can already set various values for the cookiebanners.service.mode about:config setting on Firefox nightly. 1 denies all cookies, 2 also accepts if there is no option to deny or if denying didn't work.
- isthisthingon99 4y ago
  In the old days (Netscape Navigator) you'd get an annoying popup asking you if you wanted to store cookies. Firefox came from the open sourcing of Netscape. How things repeat!
- guilhas 4y ago
  Firefox should worry more with core browser, standards, speed, security, bugs... And less with implementing things that already exist as addons
  - stuartd 4y ago
    Browser add-ons require permissions which you might not want to grant to arbitrary code. And anyway, it’s a truism that products can and will absorb add-ons into their code (cf ‘Sherlocked’)
    - guilhas 4y ago
      They can spend time absorbing whatever they want, just make sure first you have a capable browser, that can be competitive, maybe absorb some market share from other Chromes. Instead of being a constant crippleware that we just barely tolerate, with half cooked "nice" to haves If you don't trust, don't install. Maybe don't install anything on your machine just to be safe Firefox can improve their addons security audit, their addons website to help users make a choice... absorbing addons seems like wasting time
    - 4y ago
theobeers 4y ago
I’m glad someone did this. I immediately uninstalled the extension when I saw that it had been acquired by Avast.
Liquix 4y ago
Excellent extension with one glaring flaw: IDCAC accepts cookies if there is no option to decline them. You don't see annoying popups anymore, but the cookies are still there tracking you. This can be combated by combining it combined with Cookie AutoDelete [0]. Cookie AutoDelete solves the problem by purging all cookies automatically (except your whitelist) when the tab is closed. They work great together [0] https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete
- ThunderSizzle 4y ago
  Isn't uMatrix just as good, since it blocks non-first party cookies by default?
  - karaterobot 4y ago
    I thought the goal of IDCAC was to get rid of those annoying cookie consent popups. It tries to block or hide the popup, but when cookies are required to use the site it automatically accepts them, assuming you will handle erasing unwanted cookies in some other way.
    - happymellon 4y ago
      > when cookies are required to use the site it automatically accepts them This makes no sense. Cookies required for operation of a site are not covered by GDPR, so shouldn't be in a cookie consent form. If you use cookies for your shopping cart, then you do not need to ask permission to create a shopping cart cookie.
      - mmmmmbop 4y ago
        There are quite a few news websites that deny access to the site unless you agree to being tracked (e.g. [1]). Authorities in EU countries are split on the legality of that -- the Dutch data protection authority explicitly disallows such behavior [2], while German authorities are silently tolerating it [3]. In my opinion, this goes against the spirit and the letter of GDPR, but it seems that they are getting away with it for now. The matter hasn't been discussed by the European Court of Justice yet. In those cases, as a non-paying user, you essentially have the choice between accepting being tracked, or not viewing the site. IDCAC errs on the side of being able to view the site. [1] https://www.zeit.de/ https://www.zeit.de/ [2] https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/nl/nieuws/websites-moeten-toegankelijk-blijven-bij-weigeren-tracking-cookies https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/nl/nieuws/websites-moe... [3] In the case of online raffles, a German court even explicitly allowed forcing users to agree to their data being used for advertising purposes if they want to participate in the raffle. https://openjur.de/u/2185336.html https://openjur.de/u/2185336.html
dang 4y ago
Related: “I don’t care about cookies“ web extension acquired by Avast - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32850799 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32850799 - Sept 2022 (215 comments) I don't care about cookies - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26519457 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26519457 - March 2021 (187 comments)
stvnbn 4y ago
FYI this extension recognizes pop-ups and automatically fills them out based on your preferences. Currently open sourced https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/
- d12bb 4y ago
  Ah nice, now I'm spoilt for choice again… Currently using Super Agent, now I wonder if this one may be better…
Cyberdog 4y ago
I've been using Super Agent for this purpose since it has a Safari extension. It seems to work in more cases than not. Its web site feels very… corporate, and I can't find a source code link anyway, so I'm sure it's making money off of me somehow, but I can't figure out how - according to the site's FAQ, it isn't selling any data, so who knows. https://www.super-agent.com https://www.super-agent.com
- d12bb 4y ago
  Using that too, but as another user in this thread pointed to https://consentomatic.au.dk https://consentomatic.au.dk, I'll try that for a bit I guess..
fomine3 4y ago
Every time I say we miss P3P
- boltzmann-brain 4y ago
  gosh, yeah. This should be discussed way more in this thread. IDCAC and GPDR popups are not just a result of a broken law, they are also result of a lack of technological progress and standardization by the industry giants. It has been killed because those same giants would stand to lose a lot from it becoming the norm. BTW for anyone who doesn't know what P3P is: > The Platform for Privacy Preferences Project (P3P) enables Websites to express their privacy practices in a standard format that can be retrieved automatically and interpreted easily by user agents. P3P user agents will allow users to be informed of site practices (in both machine- and human-readable formats) and to automate decision-making based on these practices when appropriate. Thus users need not read the privacy policies at every site they visit. How that would become complicated by regional laws requiring specific legal wording is anyone's guess, though - as this standard never became widely used.
CursedUrn 4y ago
This github page seems a bit casual/flippant, there's no explanation of what the extension does or anything to build trust/confidence in the author. Hopefully it gets more developed as it sounds like a good idea.
encryptluks2 4y ago
I do something similar. You can configure this using Chromium policies and don't need an extension. I wonder if Firefox policies does the same thing as well.
clement_b 4y ago
I uninstalled after the acquisition as I wasn't keen to hear the Avast siren go off every time a cookie consent banner is detected.
ghusto 4y ago
I don't understand this attitude. You're annoyed by company's malicious compliance with a law designed to protect you, so you act out against the law, and not the malicious compliance? Isn't the correct response to say "I always care about unnecessary cookies, don't set them"? I know there are much less popular extensions that do just this, but I won't link to any because I'm not sure which are best now (just did a search and realised my choice may be out of date).
- scatters 4y ago
  We didn't ask to be protected. The malicious compliance is an obvious consequence of the badly written law.
  - okamiueru 4y ago
    I cannot speak to how well the law is written, but the effect it has, although annoying, is not an indication of it being a bad one. If a website wants to track a user and sell that data to a couple of hundred data brokers, having to let people know, is in my opinion a good thing. That they go about making that a shitty experience is on them.
  - ghusto 4y ago
    Finishing that line of thought gives: "I didn't ask to be protected, so this makes sense to me". Applying the same logic evenly gives me: "I'm very glad someone is keeping these companies in check, so this doesn't make sense to me", which gets us nowhere. I think we can agree that none of us likes to be taken advantage of, and this law is trying to stop that. EDIT: P.S. The law actually isn't badly written, and the malicious compliance is _breaking_ it. The law accounts for these kinds of behaviours, it's just that nobody has tested it yet. Though there are people trying to bring the widespread law breaking to the attention of the EU
    - scatters 4y ago
      > I think we can agree that none of us likes to be taken advantage of, and this law is trying to stop that. The disagreement is over whether paying for information services with your personal data is being taken advantage of. Yes, there's an imbalance of size, and of information, but the attention market is also intensely competitive and - even in social media - switching costs for the consumer are low. A market-oriented solution would have been to sponsor independent organizations to score websites on privacy.
wodenokoto 4y ago
I've been thinking: the number of websites I want to stay logged into are quite few, and most of them I don't need to keep being logged into when clicking external links. From my point of view, that is what _I_ need cookies for. E.g., I like to be able to go to facebook.com and be logged in, but when I click an external link, I kind a like to open a tab where I am not logged in. Same for hacker news and Youtube and my email. When I'm "outside" those websites, sure, just accept all cookies and delete them when I close the tab I imagine this can be done with Firefox containers and a bit of smarts, but I don't know how.
- coffeekid 4y ago
  I was looking for this exact setup a couple months back. I found a system that works for me, though not exactly perfect. You can use the extension "Simple Tab Groups"[1] to automatically open some domains in specific Firefox containers like you described, by assigning a container to a group, and then configuring a domain to always open in that group. The downside is that not all groups will be visible at a time, and you'll need to first select your previous group before finding the tab you came from. For me, that's an acceptable downside given the advantages it brings. [1] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/simple-tab-groups/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/simple-tab-gr...
- alrlroipsp 4y ago
  Right click link: Open in new container tab. No extensions needed.
- nsomaru 4y ago
  It’s actually not that hard: 1. Install Firefox container management extension 2. Make some containers 3. Visit websites and add them to only open in certain containers 4. Install cookie auto delete extension. 5. Add exceptions for sites you want to be logged into for each container the first time you visit them. I have some other extension that makes a temp container for each new click that I can’t remember the name of now and I’m not by my PC. Cookie auto delete may be superfluous. Con is google is still broken for me (mainly gmail) because of the web of redirects they do and there’s no way in the container extension to add a top level domain to a particular extension (that I’ve found).
langsoul-com 4y ago
Was there any ublock origin filter that could do the same. Cookie popups are aids, what's someone gonna do? Say no and then quit the site? It doesn't actually change behaviour from the root cause, just passes on the different to the end user.
- yaantc 4y ago
  > Was there any ublock origin filter that could do the same. Yes, "Fanboy's Annoyance" list under the "Annoyance" section, in uBo "Filter Lists" configuration tab. I enabled it recently only, and so far it looks OK with IDCAC removed. And uBo is also supported on Firefox for Android.
  - boltzmann-brain 4y ago
    You can hack in support for every add-on into FF Nightly: https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-add-on-in-firefox-nightly-for-android-but-it-is-complicated/ https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-ad...
thepangolino 4y ago
TheLudd 4y ago
Can I get this on mobile?
- boltzmann-brain 4y ago
  You can get any addon that's up on AMO on mobile: https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-add-on-in-firefox-nightly-for-android-but-it-is-complicated/ https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-ad... this specific fork of IDCAC isn't on AMO though.
Beltiras 4y ago
I'm using Consent-O-Matic[0]. Works pretty well. [0]: https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic
lazyeye 4y ago
Fyi to prevent cookie popups, in Ublock Origin enable these 2 filter lists under "Annoyances" Adguard annoyances Ublock filter - annoyances
ajsnigrutin 4y ago
I have no idea why cookie retention is a server-side thing instead of a client-side thing. Browsers should silently accept cookies, and delete them once the tab/window has been closed, and cookies should be stored only on user request (a toggle near the url bar) or after submitting a login form.
npteljes 4y ago
I'm similarly annoyed by cookie popups - why can't they just accept that I won't take their shit? Fortunately there's an addon for this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-matic/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-mat... With this you can preconfigure your choices, even accepting them. The default is to reject all.
rkangel 4y ago
Is there any reason this is installed manually and not in the Firefox addons store?
stillcookies 4y ago
Safe alternative: https://www.stilldontcareaboutcookies.com/ https://www.stilldontcareaboutcookies.com/

262 points by bj-rn 4y ago

I was never clear on this extension. Does it just suppress the the cookie prompts, does it only accept essential cookies or does it do the default action and accept everything?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fourmajor 4y ago
From their Chrome web store page (https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-cookies/fihnjjcciajhdojfnbdddfaoknhalnja https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/i-dont-care-about-...) > In most cases, it just blocks or hides cookie related pop-ups. When it's needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what's easier to do). It doesn't delete cookies.
uwuemu 4y ago
I mean... if you don't care about cookies (as is the extension's name)... you don't care about cookies. Asking what happens to them is missing the point.
- josefx 4y ago
  On the other hand if someone offers you a cookie for a dollar and you say "I don't care about cookies" you now owe them a dollar.
LordHeini 4y ago
If implemented correctly clicking "Accept" on a cookie banner will trigger the loading of the tracking scripts. Which will then set its cookies. At least that is how i implement google analytics for example. By not showing the button in the first place, nothing happens and no cookies are set (apart from the functional ones which are set regardless). Other than that it really does not matter that much because if you use a plugin like this you will usually use an add blocker as well which removes the tracking.

xuhu 4y ago

It would be awesome if Avast moved the extension source code to Github or somewhere else public. I hope existing users won't settle blindly for whatever changes get added from now on.

anilshanbhag 4y ago

This is a manifest V2 extension. Unless someone converts it to V3, it will stop working end of this year.

klondike_ 4y ago
Not a problem on Firefox and its derivatives
bj-rn 4y ago
They are working on that: https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/pull/9 https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/pull/9
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
ravenstine 4y ago
Does anyone know if Brave will still support v2?
- yyyk2 4y ago
  It's based on Chromium, so no.
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    Is it that simple? Brave has various proprietary bits, so it's possible they could maintain v2 support. Perhaps others know if this is feasible, from a technical perspective.
    - ThunderSizzle 4y ago
      Until a chromium browser let's you use arbitrary extension stores, I don't think there's any fork that's divergent enough. And I haven't found one after months of searching. I'm almost to the point of trying to do it myself.
  - 4y ago

echelon 4y ago

Stop using / enabling Chrome and its derivatives. Any use of that codebase - Brave, etc. - empowers Google. They're the ones pushing it forward, and developer mindshare empowers the player holding the reins. Firefox or broke.

wartijn_ 4y ago
The original version of this add-on is available on Firefox and getting this fork on Firefox is on the to do list[0] [0] https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/issues/7 https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies/issues...
ThunderSizzle 4y ago
- jraph 4y ago
  > Firefox also wants to deplatform me and nearly half my country. What does this mean?
  - geraldwhen 4y ago
  - the_third_wave 4y ago
    I assume it is related to the following, written by Mozilla's activist-CEO: https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/we-need-more-than-deplat... In this piece she takes a clearly partisan stance with regard to "Trump" (between quotes because the stance is against the "movement", not the person) and calls for censorship - disguised under vague terms like Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation. No matter whether you agree with Baker or not it should be clear that a pro-censorship stance coming from the head of a browser company is a bad sign. I'm a die-hard Firefox user and not a resident of the D.S.A. but that does not mean I won't be affected by this type of activism. If Baker and her ilk go beyond their current promotional activism - from pride-month themes to "voices of colour" extension suggestions - to actually embrace the censorship she seems to desire I'll jump ship. Not to Chrome or Safari or anything like that, probably to one of the de-fanged Blink-based browsers like Bromite or Ungoogled Chromium.

est31 4y ago

FTR, Firefox is working on supporting this natively: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1783015 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1783015 According to this german article: https://www.soeren-hentzschel.at/firefox/firefox-sagt-cookie-dialogen-den-kampf-an/ https://www.soeren-hentzschel.at/firefox/firefox-sagt-cookie... , you can already set various values for the cookiebanners.service.mode about:config setting on Firefox nightly. 1 denies all cookies, 2 also accepts if there is no option to deny or if denying didn't work.

isthisthingon99 4y ago
In the old days (Netscape Navigator) you'd get an annoying popup asking you if you wanted to store cookies. Firefox came from the open sourcing of Netscape. How things repeat!
guilhas 4y ago
Firefox should worry more with core browser, standards, speed, security, bugs... And less with implementing things that already exist as addons
- stuartd 4y ago
  Browser add-ons require permissions which you might not want to grant to arbitrary code. And anyway, it’s a truism that products can and will absorb add-ons into their code (cf ‘Sherlocked’)
  - guilhas 4y ago
    They can spend time absorbing whatever they want, just make sure first you have a capable browser, that can be competitive, maybe absorb some market share from other Chromes. Instead of being a constant crippleware that we just barely tolerate, with half cooked "nice" to haves If you don't trust, don't install. Maybe don't install anything on your machine just to be safe Firefox can improve their addons security audit, their addons website to help users make a choice... absorbing addons seems like wasting time
  - 4y ago

theobeers 4y ago

I’m glad someone did this. I immediately uninstalled the extension when I saw that it had been acquired by Avast.

Liquix 4y ago

Excellent extension with one glaring flaw: IDCAC accepts cookies if there is no option to decline them. You don't see annoying popups anymore, but the cookies are still there tracking you. This can be combated by combining it combined with Cookie AutoDelete [0]. Cookie AutoDelete solves the problem by purging all cookies automatically (except your whitelist) when the tab is closed. They work great together [0] https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete https://github.com/Cookie-AutoDelete/Cookie-AutoDelete

ThunderSizzle 4y ago
Isn't uMatrix just as good, since it blocks non-first party cookies by default?
- karaterobot 4y ago
  I thought the goal of IDCAC was to get rid of those annoying cookie consent popups. It tries to block or hide the popup, but when cookies are required to use the site it automatically accepts them, assuming you will handle erasing unwanted cookies in some other way.
  - happymellon 4y ago
    > when cookies are required to use the site it automatically accepts them This makes no sense. Cookies required for operation of a site are not covered by GDPR, so shouldn't be in a cookie consent form. If you use cookies for your shopping cart, then you do not need to ask permission to create a shopping cart cookie.
    - mmmmmbop 4y ago
      There are quite a few news websites that deny access to the site unless you agree to being tracked (e.g. [1]). Authorities in EU countries are split on the legality of that -- the Dutch data protection authority explicitly disallows such behavior [2], while German authorities are silently tolerating it [3]. In my opinion, this goes against the spirit and the letter of GDPR, but it seems that they are getting away with it for now. The matter hasn't been discussed by the European Court of Justice yet. In those cases, as a non-paying user, you essentially have the choice between accepting being tracked, or not viewing the site. IDCAC errs on the side of being able to view the site. [1] https://www.zeit.de/ https://www.zeit.de/ [2] https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/nl/nieuws/websites-moeten-toegankelijk-blijven-bij-weigeren-tracking-cookies https://autoriteitpersoonsgegevens.nl/nl/nieuws/websites-moe... [3] In the case of online raffles, a German court even explicitly allowed forcing users to agree to their data being used for advertising purposes if they want to participate in the raffle. https://openjur.de/u/2185336.html https://openjur.de/u/2185336.html

dang 4y ago

Related: “I don’t care about cookies“ web extension acquired by Avast - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32850799 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32850799 - Sept 2022 (215 comments) I don't care about cookies - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26519457 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26519457 - March 2021 (187 comments)

stvnbn 4y ago

FYI this extension recognizes pop-ups and automatically fills them out based on your preferences. Currently open sourced https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/

d12bb 4y ago
Ah nice, now I'm spoilt for choice again… Currently using Super Agent, now I wonder if this one may be better…

Cyberdog 4y ago

I've been using Super Agent for this purpose since it has a Safari extension. It seems to work in more cases than not. Its web site feels very… corporate, and I can't find a source code link anyway, so I'm sure it's making money off of me somehow, but I can't figure out how - according to the site's FAQ, it isn't selling any data, so who knows. https://www.super-agent.com https://www.super-agent.com

d12bb 4y ago
Using that too, but as another user in this thread pointed to https://consentomatic.au.dk https://consentomatic.au.dk, I'll try that for a bit I guess..

fomine3 4y ago

Every time I say we miss P3P

boltzmann-brain 4y ago
gosh, yeah. This should be discussed way more in this thread. IDCAC and GPDR popups are not just a result of a broken law, they are also result of a lack of technological progress and standardization by the industry giants. It has been killed because those same giants would stand to lose a lot from it becoming the norm. BTW for anyone who doesn't know what P3P is: > The Platform for Privacy Preferences Project (P3P) enables Websites to express their privacy practices in a standard format that can be retrieved automatically and interpreted easily by user agents. P3P user agents will allow users to be informed of site practices (in both machine- and human-readable formats) and to automate decision-making based on these practices when appropriate. Thus users need not read the privacy policies at every site they visit. How that would become complicated by regional laws requiring specific legal wording is anyone's guess, though - as this standard never became widely used.

CursedUrn 4y ago

This github page seems a bit casual/flippant, there's no explanation of what the extension does or anything to build trust/confidence in the author. Hopefully it gets more developed as it sounds like a good idea.

encryptluks2 4y ago

I do something similar. You can configure this using Chromium policies and don't need an extension. I wonder if Firefox policies does the same thing as well.

clement_b 4y ago

I uninstalled after the acquisition as I wasn't keen to hear the Avast siren go off every time a cookie consent banner is detected.

ghusto 4y ago

I don't understand this attitude. You're annoyed by company's malicious compliance with a law designed to protect you, so you act out against the law, and not the malicious compliance? Isn't the correct response to say "I always care about unnecessary cookies, don't set them"? I know there are much less popular extensions that do just this, but I won't link to any because I'm not sure which are best now (just did a search and realised my choice may be out of date).

scatters 4y ago
We didn't ask to be protected. The malicious compliance is an obvious consequence of the badly written law.
- okamiueru 4y ago
  I cannot speak to how well the law is written, but the effect it has, although annoying, is not an indication of it being a bad one. If a website wants to track a user and sell that data to a couple of hundred data brokers, having to let people know, is in my opinion a good thing. That they go about making that a shitty experience is on them.
- ghusto 4y ago
  Finishing that line of thought gives: "I didn't ask to be protected, so this makes sense to me". Applying the same logic evenly gives me: "I'm very glad someone is keeping these companies in check, so this doesn't make sense to me", which gets us nowhere. I think we can agree that none of us likes to be taken advantage of, and this law is trying to stop that. EDIT: P.S. The law actually isn't badly written, and the malicious compliance is _breaking_ it. The law accounts for these kinds of behaviours, it's just that nobody has tested it yet. Though there are people trying to bring the widespread law breaking to the attention of the EU
  - scatters 4y ago
    > I think we can agree that none of us likes to be taken advantage of, and this law is trying to stop that. The disagreement is over whether paying for information services with your personal data is being taken advantage of. Yes, there's an imbalance of size, and of information, but the attention market is also intensely competitive and - even in social media - switching costs for the consumer are low. A market-oriented solution would have been to sponsor independent organizations to score websites on privacy.

wodenokoto 4y ago

I've been thinking: the number of websites I want to stay logged into are quite few, and most of them I don't need to keep being logged into when clicking external links. From my point of view, that is what _I_ need cookies for. E.g., I like to be able to go to facebook.com and be logged in, but when I click an external link, I kind a like to open a tab where I am not logged in. Same for hacker news and Youtube and my email. When I'm "outside" those websites, sure, just accept all cookies and delete them when I close the tab I imagine this can be done with Firefox containers and a bit of smarts, but I don't know how.

coffeekid 4y ago
I was looking for this exact setup a couple months back. I found a system that works for me, though not exactly perfect. You can use the extension "Simple Tab Groups"[1] to automatically open some domains in specific Firefox containers like you described, by assigning a container to a group, and then configuring a domain to always open in that group. The downside is that not all groups will be visible at a time, and you'll need to first select your previous group before finding the tab you came from. For me, that's an acceptable downside given the advantages it brings. [1] - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/simple-tab-groups/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/simple-tab-gr...
alrlroipsp 4y ago
Right click link: Open in new container tab. No extensions needed.
nsomaru 4y ago
It’s actually not that hard: 1. Install Firefox container management extension 2. Make some containers 3. Visit websites and add them to only open in certain containers 4. Install cookie auto delete extension. 5. Add exceptions for sites you want to be logged into for each container the first time you visit them. I have some other extension that makes a temp container for each new click that I can’t remember the name of now and I’m not by my PC. Cookie auto delete may be superfluous. Con is google is still broken for me (mainly gmail) because of the web of redirects they do and there’s no way in the container extension to add a top level domain to a particular extension (that I’ve found).

langsoul-com 4y ago

Was there any ublock origin filter that could do the same. Cookie popups are aids, what's someone gonna do? Say no and then quit the site? It doesn't actually change behaviour from the root cause, just passes on the different to the end user.

yaantc 4y ago
> Was there any ublock origin filter that could do the same. Yes, "Fanboy's Annoyance" list under the "Annoyance" section, in uBo "Filter Lists" configuration tab. I enabled it recently only, and so far it looks OK with IDCAC removed. And uBo is also supported on Firefox for Android.
- boltzmann-brain 4y ago
  You can hack in support for every add-on into FF Nightly: https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-add-on-in-firefox-nightly-for-android-but-it-is-complicated/ https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-ad...

thepangolino 4y ago

TheLudd 4y ago

Can I get this on mobile?

boltzmann-brain 4y ago
You can get any addon that's up on AMO on mobile: https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-add-on-in-firefox-nightly-for-android-but-it-is-complicated/ https://www.ghacks.net/2020/10/01/you-can-now-install-any-ad... this specific fork of IDCAC isn't on AMO though.

Beltiras 4y ago

I'm using Consent-O-Matic[0]. Works pretty well. [0]: https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic https://github.com/cavi-au/Consent-O-Matic

lazyeye 4y ago

Fyi to prevent cookie popups, in Ublock Origin enable these 2 filter lists under "Annoyances" Adguard annoyances Ublock filter - annoyances

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

I have no idea why cookie retention is a server-side thing instead of a client-side thing. Browsers should silently accept cookies, and delete them once the tab/window has been closed, and cookies should be stored only on user request (a toggle near the url bar) or after submitting a login form.

npteljes 4y ago

I'm similarly annoyed by cookie popups - why can't they just accept that I won't take their shit? Fortunately there's an addon for this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-matic/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-mat... With this you can preconfigure your choices, even accepting them. The default is to reject all.

rkangel 4y ago

Is there any reason this is installed manually and not in the Firefox addons store?

stillcookies 4y ago

Safe alternative: https://www.stilldontcareaboutcookies.com/ https://www.stilldontcareaboutcookies.com/