4 ms·

Some people just want everything, no compromises.

_puk 4y ago
But isn't this what Firefox containers achieve? My understanding is that cookies etc aren't shared between containers, so I can stay logged in, and not be tracked across websites. If it's achievable, why compromise?
- noahmasur 4y ago
  Your browser can still be fingerprinted without cookies. The site just needs enough unique information (user agent, timezone, screen size, IP, operating system, country, etc.) to form a trackable identity.
  - jwestbury 4y ago
    > IP This is a surprisingly effective one when combined with other users of your network. A couple of years ago, I started getting Facebook ads for things I'd never looked at, but that I knew my wife had looked at. We don't share any devices, and she doesn't even have a Facebook account. It's pretty troubling how invasive shadow profiles are.
- hiccuphippo 4y ago
  What I'd like is a Mullvad container in regular Firefox so I can choose what sites to open in it, or rather make it the default and move a site to another container if I want permanent cookies. I use temporary containers now but the extra fingerprinting features appeal to me.
  - SadTrombone 4y ago
    You could look into Mozilla's VPN offering, it does what you want and is powered by Mullvad.
    - lxgr 4y ago
      It’s a neat feature, but beware: Per-container VPN reveals your real IP if you‘re also using uBlock in the default configuration at the moment due to a limitation in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dashboard:-Settings#uncloak-canonical-names https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dashboard:-Settings#u...
overthrow 4y ago
That's not very charitable. Some people just want to pick a different point on the tradeoff between convenience and privacy. Imagine User A uses Fastmail every day, logging in manually every morning. User B uses Fastmail every day, with a saved login cookie. How is User B's privacy any worse? What would User B gain from not having that choice?
- hitekker 4y ago
  The GP said "some people" not everyone. Some people want all the convenience and the illusion of privacy; the benefits minus the cost. It's human nature to want something without paying for it, just as it is human nature to pretend that desire doesn't exist
- teawrecks 4y ago
  It's not a matter of user choice, it's a matter of maintenance and product integrity. User B's privacy is objectively lessened by allowing tracking cookies, but that is their choice. What is out of the user's control is what mullvad chooses to spend their time supporting. If mullvad allows users to turn off a privacy feature, now that's a permutation they have to test for. It's also an attack vector they've enabled, either through user carelessness or social engineering. Mullvad wants to be able to say "here's a browser, it's 100% private" and not have to say "as long as you do X, and don't do Y, and...". Every other browser already does that.
  - ta1243 4y ago
    If someone is logging into fastmail every day how does preventing this from being remembered help?
    - jchmrt 4y ago
      A possible scenadio might be that one day the user wants to log in to their other fastmail account, which they don't want to be linked to their main one in any way.

_puk 4y ago

But isn't this what Firefox containers achieve? My understanding is that cookies etc aren't shared between containers, so I can stay logged in, and not be tracked across websites. If it's achievable, why compromise?

noahmasur 4y ago
Your browser can still be fingerprinted without cookies. The site just needs enough unique information (user agent, timezone, screen size, IP, operating system, country, etc.) to form a trackable identity.
- jwestbury 4y ago
  > IP This is a surprisingly effective one when combined with other users of your network. A couple of years ago, I started getting Facebook ads for things I'd never looked at, but that I knew my wife had looked at. We don't share any devices, and she doesn't even have a Facebook account. It's pretty troubling how invasive shadow profiles are.
hiccuphippo 4y ago
What I'd like is a Mullvad container in regular Firefox so I can choose what sites to open in it, or rather make it the default and move a site to another container if I want permanent cookies. I use temporary containers now but the extra fingerprinting features appeal to me.
- SadTrombone 4y ago
  You could look into Mozilla's VPN offering, it does what you want and is powered by Mullvad.
  - lxgr 4y ago
    It’s a neat feature, but beware: Per-container VPN reveals your real IP if you‘re also using uBlock in the default configuration at the moment due to a limitation in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dashboard:-Settings#uncloak-canonical-names https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Dashboard:-Settings#u...

overthrow 4y ago

That's not very charitable. Some people just want to pick a different point on the tradeoff between convenience and privacy. Imagine User A uses Fastmail every day, logging in manually every morning. User B uses Fastmail every day, with a saved login cookie. How is User B's privacy any worse? What would User B gain from not having that choice?

hitekker 4y ago
The GP said "some people" not everyone. Some people want all the convenience and the illusion of privacy; the benefits minus the cost. It's human nature to want something without paying for it, just as it is human nature to pretend that desire doesn't exist
teawrecks 4y ago
It's not a matter of user choice, it's a matter of maintenance and product integrity. User B's privacy is objectively lessened by allowing tracking cookies, but that is their choice. What is out of the user's control is what mullvad chooses to spend their time supporting. If mullvad allows users to turn off a privacy feature, now that's a permutation they have to test for. It's also an attack vector they've enabled, either through user carelessness or social engineering. Mullvad wants to be able to say "here's a browser, it's 100% private" and not have to say "as long as you do X, and don't do Y, and...". Every other browser already does that.
- ta1243 4y ago
  If someone is logging into fastmail every day how does preventing this from being remembered help?
  - jchmrt 4y ago
    A possible scenadio might be that one day the user wants to log in to their other fastmail account, which they don't want to be linked to their main one in any way.