3 ms·
This is precisely what I'm ranting about. At this point, the Facebook container is privacy theatre. You don't need a Facebook container, at least since “Total
by bad_user 3y ago
This is precisely what I'm ranting about. At this point, the Facebook container is privacy theatre.
You don't need a Facebook container, at least since “Total Cookie Protection”. Which itself it's just a better way to “disable 3rd party cookies”, that doesn't break websites, although Firefox's isolation goes beyond just cookies.
https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-rolls-out-total-cookie-protection-by-default-to-all-users-worldwide/ https://blog.mozilla.org/en/products/firefox/firefox-rolls-o...
And Firefox isn't the only one that does it, although it may be the best. But Safari, Brave Browser and even Chrome have deployed similar protections. See for instance: https://brave.com/privacy-updates/7-ephemeral-storage/ https://brave.com/privacy-updates/7-ephemeral-storage/
- kelnos 3y agoHow is it theatre? Do Firefox's containers not actually isolate Facebook from the rest of your browsing? I don't really understand your gripe.
- bad_user 3y agoI'm pretty sure I spoke plainly: > You don't need a Facebook container, at least since “Total Cookie Protection”. It's theater because it does nothing in addition to what Firefox already does without use of containers. But keep installing that add-on if it makes you feel good.