4 ms·
I don't see how this is more intrusive for privacy than what you can already get from access logs.
by Kiro 3y ago
I don't see how this is more intrusive for privacy than what you can already get from access logs.
- colesantiago 3y agoIt is still tracking you so it needs to be blocked.
- Kiro 3y agoSo are access logs. How are you going to block those?
- colesantiago 3y agoI never said anything about access logs, I specifically mentioned this CSS trick that will become popular for ad companies to track people. For this, this would need to block the endpoint or send obfuscated data deliberately in protest of this. Should you want to cover access logs also, then forms of tracking then sending excessive, random obfuscation data with adnauseam would also help here. https://adnauseam.io/ https://adnauseam.io/
- jokethrowaway 3y agoI sure hope you're being sarcastic here and illustrating the ridiculousness of privacy extremists (who, btw, ruined the web, thanks to a few idiot politicians in the EU). If not, what's wrong with a service knowing you're accessing it? How can they serve a page without knowing you're getting a page?
- callalex 3y agoRuined the web? It sure seems like the web still works from my perspective. What has been ruined for you?
- matrss 3y agoIf it is not then it must be unnecessary, since you could get the same information from the access logs already.