9 ms·

Hush – Noiseless Browsing for Safari

159 points by sysadm1n 3y ago

asynchronous 3y ago
Cookie banners are so annoying. I support any extension to remove them.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  They are probably designed to be like that so you can rush into accepting the tracking across the web. The web has become a sad place where most of the content is made for showing you ads and tracking you around, therefore tracking cookies are needed, therefore tracking cookie permission banners are displayed.
  - posix86 3y ago
    If you don't click accept on the very first page, websites can't connect you to where you're coming from, which is why they're like that. I mean, in theory they could do that retroactively, but that would be waaay to complex. Popular cookie banners enable services by executing their javascript. There's no event tracking mechanism whatsoever. Cringe fact about cookie banners. It's probably because every engineer spends as little time as possible on it, since it's boring af. It's annoying & boring to implement, and once it's done, annoying to everyone that sees it.
  - rpastuszak 3y ago
    > They are probably designed to be like that so you can rush into accepting the tracking across the web. Correct (speaking as someone who worked in an adjacent area).
- frizlab 3y ago
  The DuckDuckGo browser automatically manages (auto-refuses) these banners. It also has a lot of privacy-preserving features and a distraction-free youtube player that’s nice. And most of all it’s WebKit based, which is good for engine diversity, I guess.
  - stranded22 3y ago
    On iOS, the only engine available is WebKit. On Android, it uses blink (Chromium)
    - frizlab 3y ago
      I was talking about macOS where it uses WebKit when it could use whatever they wanted.
- bananapub 3y ago
  they're designed to be annoying, a perfectly reasonable response to GDPR was to stop being fucking creepy
  - rpbiwer2 3y ago
    Is not being creepy sufficient? My understanding is that you need consent to collect literally any PII, e.g. an email address.
    - Propelloni 3y ago
      No, that's not correct. The GDPR is a surprisingly sensible set of rules, e.g. it allows collection and storage of data under certain circumstances. The salient point here is probably that it is allowed to collect and store all data required to fullfil a contractual obligation, e.g your home address, or if you are shopping at a pharmacy your prescriptions. The important part is not what type of data* is collected, but that the collector is restricted to use that is required to fullfil the obligations. If you want to use it for something different (say direct marketing) you have to ask for permission. This extends to many areas, including e-mail, if they are required to deliver your services you may just save them. However, you may not use the e-mail to send newsletters. Of course, you want to double opt-in e-mails in any case unless you don't mind false or malicious entries and being labeled as a spammer. But that has nothing to do with the GDPR. * the type of data is of importance when we are talking about data breaches and fines. Losing e-mail addresses is bad, losing prescriptions is much worse.
    - rcxdude 3y ago
      No. Consent is only needed for data you collect which is unnecessary to provide the service you are offering and is unexpected by the user. If you require an email address for a mailing list or notifications, you do not need consent. If you have webserver logs containing IP addressees you use for debugging and abuse prevention, you do not need consent (though you probably want to not hang onto them for longer than necessary for those purposes). Same with names and addresses for billing and shipping, etc. If you collect data for analytics or targeted advertising, you need consent (which means rejecting that option needs to be the default and at least as easy as accepting in the dialog, something which many of these dialogues fail at. If it takes more clicks to close the dialog without 'accepting', that is not GDPR compliant in the view of most regulators).
- puquesnrn 3y ago
  [dead]
kseifried 3y ago
I’m trying to think of when I want my browser to make noise. Outside of Squadcast, YouTube and CBC, and… I’m drawing a blank. I feel like allow listing a handful of websites to make noise would be fine. Edit: Also, let’s see if anybody replying to this actually read the article I know this isn’t exactly what the article talks about but it’s what came to my mind when I saw the title.
gtowey 3y ago
GDPR in Europe is what started it all. The law says that you must get explicit user consent for all kinds of data tracking. However it doesn't say how that should happen. The annoying banners are completely a decision the industry has made. It's so weird to me that pretty much everyone adopted a near identical way to implement this. It also feels like retaliation -- a way to punish users by making these banners as disruptive as possible, and then blame it on regulations. It's like companies would rather destroy the web than give in and actually make it better.
- tikkun 3y ago
  What are some better ways to do it?
  - lnxg33k1 3y ago
    Respect DNT header
    - IggleSniggle 3y ago
      Without a law to enforce that, it's a race to the bottom as the more effective monetization is to use DNT as a signal for improved tracking.
      - lnxg33k1 3y ago
        Maybe its a good time to reshare this to check own trackability https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - JKCalhoun 3y ago
    Don't track users? Magazines, tvs never did. Advertisers seemed to survive somehow.
happybuy 3y ago
Hush is a great tool to manage annoyance blocking and is also free and open source which is nice. I've developed a full Safari ad blocking app which includes similar features (amongst others), though if you only want simple annoyance blocking to supplement Safari's in-built tracking protection instead of a full ad blocker, Hush is a good option.
timenova 3y ago
Hush has changed the desktop browsing experience completely for me. I have rarely seen cookie banners in years. I realize how big a difference it makes when I open a website on Firefox Focus on my Android phone and half the screen is just filled with the cookie accept/reject dialog box.
- MaxikCZ 3y ago
  yea I have this feeling anything I have to use a computer that isnt mine. I just dont understand how people can put up with it. The worst is people are so resistant to change (because every change is shit), they fear when I speak "wait I install extension and you wont see any ads" and see "another change that will turn to shit, I already learned to ignore the ads, I dont need no adblocking, and isnt it stealing anyways?" kinda thinking. Its sad
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
odysseus 3y ago
I like Hush for Safari, but I also use Brave. Brave blocks cookie banners by default: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...
meatjuice 3y ago
Everytime I see these kind of software, I wonder if it's really safe as it could be modified before publishing even if it's opensource.
- mantra2 3y ago
  Hush has been around for quite a while and is open, at least.
menshiki 3y ago
I've been using Hush literally since it came out. Love it.
Terretta 3y ago
Hush is one of the extensions on my devices, but both Hush and AdGuard Pro take a back seat to: A) 1Blocker: https://1blocker.com/ https://1blocker.com/ B) Orion Browser by Kagi: https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/ The first brings all the blocking customisation one needs to MacOS and iOS Safari, the other runs Firefox and Chrome extensions such as uBlock Origin: https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#extensions https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#extensions
- AnonC 3y ago
  Can you elaborate on why AdGuard Pro took a backseat to 1Blocker? Speaking of the free version, it seems like AdGuard provides more. The subscription also seems a lot cheaper than 1Blocker. I have tried Orion browser, and was thrilled to finally have uBlock Origin on iOS.
  - Crestwave 3y ago
    Note that uBlock Origin is not supported[1] on the iOS version of Orion. Rather, the ad blocking you might have attributed to it is actually from the built-in ad blocker[2], which is quite good but unfortunately not as sophisticated as an actual functioning uBO. [1] https://orionfeedback.org/d/1037-ublock-origin-settings-blank/2 https://orionfeedback.org/d/1037-ublock-origin-settings-blan... [2] Try browsing with the content blocker disabled vs with uBO disabled :)
  - Terretta 3y ago
    1. iCloud Private Relay: https://adguard.com/kb/adguard-for-mac/solving-problems/icloud-private-relay/ https://adguard.com/kb/adguard-for-mac/solving-problems/iclo... 2. Too much jitter and latency in browsing. I can tell when Ad Guard is running. I can't tell with 1Blocker. No problem with ads, it's the feel. That said, Ad Guard will kill trackers and ads in everything if you use the (hair raising) https filtering: https://adguard.com/kb/general/https-filtering/what-is-https-filtering/ https://adguard.com/kb/general/https-filtering/what-is-https... Note that NextDNS, eero+ DNS ad blocking, and AdGuard DNS are all surprisingly friendly ways less technical users can enjoy equivalent of piHole benefits for the home, including ability to block ads from "smart" TVs and consoles when the router can distribute DNS settings, as well as for mobile devices where they help with any browser or app that uses device DNS settings.
SteveSharbacker 3y ago
[dead]
nicoty 3y ago
There's also [Consent-O-Matic](https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/) for other browers.
nicoty 3y ago
There's also Consent-O-Matic https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/ for other browsers/platforms.
fatfox 3y ago
Wipr is a quiet, lightweight alternative too: https://kaylees.site/wipr.html https://kaylees.site/wipr.html
- PossiblyKyle 3y ago
  Wipr is great, but they're a separate thing. Wipr does not remove the nagging cookie requests
  - keybits 3y ago
    Wipr does remove cookie warnings. From the linked page: > Wipr blocks all ads, trackers, cryptocurrency miners, EU cookie and GDPR notices... I use Wipr and can confirm that I rarely see cookie warnings in Safari with it enabled. I might be wrong, but I believe this is better than Hush as Wipr blocks cookies, while Hush accepts website defaults.
    - PossiblyKyle 3y ago
      Interesting to see, as I still encounter these banners from time to time. I also have Wipr Extra enabled. Apologies for the mistake
mcintyre1994 3y ago
This sounds awesome! But I installed it, enabled in extensions, went to instagram in safari and got their massive cookie thing. The app says Hush is enabled, is there anything else I need to do to make it work?
- imp0cat 3y ago
  https://github.com/oblador/hush#why-does-website-x-display-nags-with-hush-enabled https://github.com/oblador/hush#why-does-website-x-display-n...
  - mcintyre1994 3y ago
    Ah thanks! Looks like that extremely obnoxious one can’t be blocked: https://github.com/oblador/hush/issues/54 https://github.com/oblador/hush/issues/54
pluijzer 3y ago
"Block nags to accept cookies and privacy invasive tracking" Took me a couple of tries to parse the senetence. Is this blocking or accepting privacy invasive tracking? Guess the former but kept reading it as the latter.
- ricklamers 3y ago
  I found https://github.com/oblador/hush#does-hush-accept-or-deny-permission-to-site-cookies https://github.com/oblador/hush#does-hush-accept-or-deny-per... So neither it seems. Whatever the website does when a user doesn’t make a choice.
  - pluijzer 3y ago
    That is nice. That is why I don't use 'I don't care about cookies'. I do care, I want to press reject, if for nothing else than to send a signal.
    - pluijzer 3y ago
      Honestly interested why this was downvoted, which yes makes for boring reading but I hope it results in some interesting argument. If you need a cookie banner it means you are collecting users' personal information. For many websites this is totally unnecessary. I do not like it if a website tells me how important my privacy is to them and then asks me to accept sharing all the information they can about me with other commercial entities. For no functional reason. I don't want to press accept that. As a insignificant little protest I want press reject. I want their statistics to show that some people don't like data being shared. "I do not care about cookies", when it cannot just hide a popup will accept the terms and removes the option for this small protest from me. That is why I do not use it. Is this somehow wrong, offensive, off-topic?
_giorgio_ 3y ago
on firefox, this is very good: I don't care about cookies https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-about-cookies/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-a... or this version (not tried): https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcareaboutcookies/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcar...
- 28304283409234 3y ago
  Switch to the second, as the first has been bought by commercial entity Avast: https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/21/avast_buys_i_dont_care_about_cookies_addon/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/21/avast_buys_i_dont_car...
Angostura 3y ago
All this is doing is effectively accepting the website defaults on the hope that those defaults follow the GDPR rules. No thanks.
- trastknast 3y ago
  Author here, actually it's the opposite. I elaborate this in a comment on the issue tracker: > Hush will block some specific scripts and hide some elements on the website, but can't and won't interact with the website itself and thus won't click on any buttons etc. I'm in EU so can only speak for our laws, but here the tracking/cookies are opt-in, meaning non-consent means not accepting. It's possible that some websites would adapt the behavior based on your geographical location, but I'd wager that most will go with the least common denominator and respect the GDPR laws everywhere.
  - Angostura 3y ago
    You say its doing the opposite, but they you set out that it appears to be doing just that. You are hoping/wagering that the site defaults to 'no collection if there is no user interaction. Sure they are supposed to do that, but how many do?
beretguy 3y ago
Another good one is StopTheScript: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stopthescript/id1588394487 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stopthescript/id1588394487 It disables JavaScript per website, just like “Disable JavaScript” extension in Firefox. It’s perfect for news websites where you just need to read some text.
the_other 3y ago
Does it automatically mark every option as “don’t track me or store my data plzthnx”? I couldn’t work out from the website if it’s doing that, or just removing banners.
- mrweasel 3y ago
  Technically simply removing the banner SHOULD be the same as "don't track me" as you've consented to nothing... in the real world you're going to get tracked. Honestly I'm not convinced that saying you don't agree to be tracked does a whole lot anyway way. These "We care about your privacy, so let us share your data with 617 partners" popups are generally all pretty questionable.
calini 3y ago
Finally, I've been looking to find something like this for a while now!

159 points by sysadm1n 3y ago

asynchronous 3y ago

Cookie banners are so annoying. I support any extension to remove them.

mrtksn 3y ago
They are probably designed to be like that so you can rush into accepting the tracking across the web. The web has become a sad place where most of the content is made for showing you ads and tracking you around, therefore tracking cookies are needed, therefore tracking cookie permission banners are displayed.
- posix86 3y ago
  If you don't click accept on the very first page, websites can't connect you to where you're coming from, which is why they're like that. I mean, in theory they could do that retroactively, but that would be waaay to complex. Popular cookie banners enable services by executing their javascript. There's no event tracking mechanism whatsoever. Cringe fact about cookie banners. It's probably because every engineer spends as little time as possible on it, since it's boring af. It's annoying & boring to implement, and once it's done, annoying to everyone that sees it.
- rpastuszak 3y ago
  > They are probably designed to be like that so you can rush into accepting the tracking across the web. Correct (speaking as someone who worked in an adjacent area).
frizlab 3y ago
The DuckDuckGo browser automatically manages (auto-refuses) these banners. It also has a lot of privacy-preserving features and a distraction-free youtube player that’s nice. And most of all it’s WebKit based, which is good for engine diversity, I guess.
- stranded22 3y ago
  On iOS, the only engine available is WebKit. On Android, it uses blink (Chromium)
  - frizlab 3y ago
    I was talking about macOS where it uses WebKit when it could use whatever they wanted.
bananapub 3y ago
they're designed to be annoying, a perfectly reasonable response to GDPR was to stop being fucking creepy
- rpbiwer2 3y ago
  Is not being creepy sufficient? My understanding is that you need consent to collect literally any PII, e.g. an email address.
  - Propelloni 3y ago
    No, that's not correct. The GDPR is a surprisingly sensible set of rules, e.g. it allows collection and storage of data under certain circumstances. The salient point here is probably that it is allowed to collect and store all data required to fullfil a contractual obligation, e.g your home address, or if you are shopping at a pharmacy your prescriptions. The important part is not what type of data* is collected, but that the collector is restricted to use that is required to fullfil the obligations. If you want to use it for something different (say direct marketing) you have to ask for permission. This extends to many areas, including e-mail, if they are required to deliver your services you may just save them. However, you may not use the e-mail to send newsletters. Of course, you want to double opt-in e-mails in any case unless you don't mind false or malicious entries and being labeled as a spammer. But that has nothing to do with the GDPR. * the type of data is of importance when we are talking about data breaches and fines. Losing e-mail addresses is bad, losing prescriptions is much worse.
  - rcxdude 3y ago
    No. Consent is only needed for data you collect which is unnecessary to provide the service you are offering and is unexpected by the user. If you require an email address for a mailing list or notifications, you do not need consent. If you have webserver logs containing IP addressees you use for debugging and abuse prevention, you do not need consent (though you probably want to not hang onto them for longer than necessary for those purposes). Same with names and addresses for billing and shipping, etc. If you collect data for analytics or targeted advertising, you need consent (which means rejecting that option needs to be the default and at least as easy as accepting in the dialog, something which many of these dialogues fail at. If it takes more clicks to close the dialog without 'accepting', that is not GDPR compliant in the view of most regulators).
puquesnrn 3y ago
[dead]

kseifried 3y ago

I’m trying to think of when I want my browser to make noise. Outside of Squadcast, YouTube and CBC, and… I’m drawing a blank. I feel like allow listing a handful of websites to make noise would be fine. Edit: Also, let’s see if anybody replying to this actually read the article I know this isn’t exactly what the article talks about but it’s what came to my mind when I saw the title.

gtowey 3y ago

GDPR in Europe is what started it all. The law says that you must get explicit user consent for all kinds of data tracking. However it doesn't say how that should happen. The annoying banners are completely a decision the industry has made. It's so weird to me that pretty much everyone adopted a near identical way to implement this. It also feels like retaliation -- a way to punish users by making these banners as disruptive as possible, and then blame it on regulations. It's like companies would rather destroy the web than give in and actually make it better.

tikkun 3y ago
What are some better ways to do it?
- lnxg33k1 3y ago
  Respect DNT header
  - IggleSniggle 3y ago
    Without a law to enforce that, it's a race to the bottom as the more effective monetization is to use DNT as a signal for improved tracking.
    - lnxg33k1 3y ago
      Maybe its a good time to reshare this to check own trackability https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/ https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- JKCalhoun 3y ago
  Don't track users? Magazines, tvs never did. Advertisers seemed to survive somehow.

happybuy 3y ago

Hush is a great tool to manage annoyance blocking and is also free and open source which is nice. I've developed a full Safari ad blocking app which includes similar features (amongst others), though if you only want simple annoyance blocking to supplement Safari's in-built tracking protection instead of a full ad blocker, Hush is a good option.

timenova 3y ago

Hush has changed the desktop browsing experience completely for me. I have rarely seen cookie banners in years. I realize how big a difference it makes when I open a website on Firefox Focus on my Android phone and half the screen is just filled with the cookie accept/reject dialog box.

MaxikCZ 3y ago
yea I have this feeling anything I have to use a computer that isnt mine. I just dont understand how people can put up with it. The worst is people are so resistant to change (because every change is shit), they fear when I speak "wait I install extension and you wont see any ads" and see "another change that will turn to shit, I already learned to ignore the ads, I dont need no adblocking, and isnt it stealing anyways?" kinda thinking. Its sad

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

odysseus 3y ago

I like Hush for Safari, but I also use Brave. Brave blocks cookie banners by default: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices...

meatjuice 3y ago

Everytime I see these kind of software, I wonder if it's really safe as it could be modified before publishing even if it's opensource.

mantra2 3y ago
Hush has been around for quite a while and is open, at least.

menshiki 3y ago

I've been using Hush literally since it came out. Love it.

Terretta 3y ago

Hush is one of the extensions on my devices, but both Hush and AdGuard Pro take a back seat to: A) 1Blocker: https://1blocker.com/ https://1blocker.com/ B) Orion Browser by Kagi: https://browser.kagi.com/ https://browser.kagi.com/ The first brings all the blocking customisation one needs to MacOS and iOS Safari, the other runs Firefox and Chrome extensions such as uBlock Origin: https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#extensions https://browser.kagi.com/faq.html#extensions

AnonC 3y ago
Can you elaborate on why AdGuard Pro took a backseat to 1Blocker? Speaking of the free version, it seems like AdGuard provides more. The subscription also seems a lot cheaper than 1Blocker. I have tried Orion browser, and was thrilled to finally have uBlock Origin on iOS.
- Crestwave 3y ago
  Note that uBlock Origin is not supported[1] on the iOS version of Orion. Rather, the ad blocking you might have attributed to it is actually from the built-in ad blocker[2], which is quite good but unfortunately not as sophisticated as an actual functioning uBO. [1] https://orionfeedback.org/d/1037-ublock-origin-settings-blank/2 https://orionfeedback.org/d/1037-ublock-origin-settings-blan... [2] Try browsing with the content blocker disabled vs with uBO disabled :)
- Terretta 3y ago
  1. iCloud Private Relay: https://adguard.com/kb/adguard-for-mac/solving-problems/icloud-private-relay/ https://adguard.com/kb/adguard-for-mac/solving-problems/iclo... 2. Too much jitter and latency in browsing. I can tell when Ad Guard is running. I can't tell with 1Blocker. No problem with ads, it's the feel. That said, Ad Guard will kill trackers and ads in everything if you use the (hair raising) https filtering: https://adguard.com/kb/general/https-filtering/what-is-https-filtering/ https://adguard.com/kb/general/https-filtering/what-is-https... Note that NextDNS, eero+ DNS ad blocking, and AdGuard DNS are all surprisingly friendly ways less technical users can enjoy equivalent of piHole benefits for the home, including ability to block ads from "smart" TVs and consoles when the router can distribute DNS settings, as well as for mobile devices where they help with any browser or app that uses device DNS settings.

SteveSharbacker 3y ago

[dead]

nicoty 3y ago

There's also [Consent-O-Matic](https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/) for other browers.

nicoty 3y ago

There's also Consent-O-Matic https://consentomatic.au.dk/ https://consentomatic.au.dk/ for other browsers/platforms.

fatfox 3y ago

Wipr is a quiet, lightweight alternative too: https://kaylees.site/wipr.html https://kaylees.site/wipr.html

PossiblyKyle 3y ago
Wipr is great, but they're a separate thing. Wipr does not remove the nagging cookie requests
- keybits 3y ago
  Wipr does remove cookie warnings. From the linked page: > Wipr blocks all ads, trackers, cryptocurrency miners, EU cookie and GDPR notices... I use Wipr and can confirm that I rarely see cookie warnings in Safari with it enabled. I might be wrong, but I believe this is better than Hush as Wipr blocks cookies, while Hush accepts website defaults.
  - PossiblyKyle 3y ago
    Interesting to see, as I still encounter these banners from time to time. I also have Wipr Extra enabled. Apologies for the mistake

mcintyre1994 3y ago

This sounds awesome! But I installed it, enabled in extensions, went to instagram in safari and got their massive cookie thing. The app says Hush is enabled, is there anything else I need to do to make it work?

imp0cat 3y ago
https://github.com/oblador/hush#why-does-website-x-display-nags-with-hush-enabled https://github.com/oblador/hush#why-does-website-x-display-n...
- mcintyre1994 3y ago
  Ah thanks! Looks like that extremely obnoxious one can’t be blocked: https://github.com/oblador/hush/issues/54 https://github.com/oblador/hush/issues/54

pluijzer 3y ago

"Block nags to accept cookies and privacy invasive tracking" Took me a couple of tries to parse the senetence. Is this blocking or accepting privacy invasive tracking? Guess the former but kept reading it as the latter.

ricklamers 3y ago
I found https://github.com/oblador/hush#does-hush-accept-or-deny-permission-to-site-cookies https://github.com/oblador/hush#does-hush-accept-or-deny-per... So neither it seems. Whatever the website does when a user doesn’t make a choice.
- pluijzer 3y ago
  That is nice. That is why I don't use 'I don't care about cookies'. I do care, I want to press reject, if for nothing else than to send a signal.
  - pluijzer 3y ago
    Honestly interested why this was downvoted, which yes makes for boring reading but I hope it results in some interesting argument. If you need a cookie banner it means you are collecting users' personal information. For many websites this is totally unnecessary. I do not like it if a website tells me how important my privacy is to them and then asks me to accept sharing all the information they can about me with other commercial entities. For no functional reason. I don't want to press accept that. As a insignificant little protest I want press reject. I want their statistics to show that some people don't like data being shared. "I do not care about cookies", when it cannot just hide a popup will accept the terms and removes the option for this small protest from me. That is why I do not use it. Is this somehow wrong, offensive, off-topic?

_giorgio_ 3y ago

on firefox, this is very good: I don't care about cookies https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-about-cookies/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/i-dont-care-a... or this version (not tried): https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcareaboutcookies/ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/istilldontcar...

28304283409234 3y ago
Switch to the second, as the first has been bought by commercial entity Avast: https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/21/avast_buys_i_dont_care_about_cookies_addon/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/09/21/avast_buys_i_dont_car...

Angostura 3y ago

All this is doing is effectively accepting the website defaults on the hope that those defaults follow the GDPR rules. No thanks.

trastknast 3y ago
Author here, actually it's the opposite. I elaborate this in a comment on the issue tracker: > Hush will block some specific scripts and hide some elements on the website, but can't and won't interact with the website itself and thus won't click on any buttons etc. I'm in EU so can only speak for our laws, but here the tracking/cookies are opt-in, meaning non-consent means not accepting. It's possible that some websites would adapt the behavior based on your geographical location, but I'd wager that most will go with the least common denominator and respect the GDPR laws everywhere.
- Angostura 3y ago
  You say its doing the opposite, but they you set out that it appears to be doing just that. You are hoping/wagering that the site defaults to 'no collection if there is no user interaction. Sure they are supposed to do that, but how many do?

beretguy 3y ago

Another good one is StopTheScript: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stopthescript/id1588394487 https://apps.apple.com/us/app/stopthescript/id1588394487 It disables JavaScript per website, just like “Disable JavaScript” extension in Firefox. It’s perfect for news websites where you just need to read some text.

the_other 3y ago

Does it automatically mark every option as “don’t track me or store my data plzthnx”? I couldn’t work out from the website if it’s doing that, or just removing banners.

mrweasel 3y ago
Technically simply removing the banner SHOULD be the same as "don't track me" as you've consented to nothing... in the real world you're going to get tracked. Honestly I'm not convinced that saying you don't agree to be tracked does a whole lot anyway way. These "We care about your privacy, so let us share your data with 617 partners" popups are generally all pretty questionable.

calini 3y ago

Finally, I've been looking to find something like this for a while now!