ghostwords

Safari on iOS is next, after we iron out any issues with Safari on macOS.

Privacy Badger works in Chrome, etc. (Manifest V3)

Moving the toggle for "accounts.google.com" to full blocking in Privacy Badger ought to do it.

Heads up, full blocking of "accounts.google.com" will break some login pages entirely. But it is a good domain to fully block as long as you're comfortable using the "Disable for this site" button when something goes wrong.

Nah, Privacy Badger is different. PB doesn't use ad blocker lists and comes with its own special features like replacing tweets with click-to-activate placeholders. And if you want to block all ads, PB works well in combination with ad blockers.

As for Firefox’s Total Cookie Protection, cookies are not the only tracking vector: https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

With my cookie question I meant, what's the point of managing cookies if you already do a good job of blocking trackers?

Re fingerprint, similar question: why does this matter if you do a good job of blocking common trackers that perform fingerprinting?

>You need multiple extensions

(I develop Privacy Badger.) There are significant benefits to adding PB or uBO to a browser that doesn't already ship with a real built-in ad blocker. While PB and uBO work well together and you may want to use both for various reasons, I wouldn't say you need both. Either one is enough by itself for most people.

>HTTPS Everywhere

HTTPS Everywhere has been deprecated and eventually removed from extension stores a few years ago: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/09/https-actually-everywh...

>Phishing detection

Why isn't what's built into browsers enough?

>Cookie auto-delete

Why bother when blocking trackers and ads?

>Pop-up blocking

Is that the same as the various "annoyances" ad blocker lists?

Thank you!

>i wasn't sure "report broken site" was actually useful, like this would really get to a human, and matter?

It matters! We generate and respond to daily aggregate reports. We also periodically comb through bunches of raw reports to see what aggregation misses.

Check out the following links:

- https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

- https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

If you like any of PB's features (like click-to-activate widgets) or want to support EFF's mission and fight for a better web.

For more, see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

Apples and oranges. PB is not ad blocker (doesn't use the same lists), made by a non profit to fight for a better web, comes with unique features.

For more, see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

This detection is off by default. For more, see https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/10/privacy-badger-learns-...

uBlock Origin is an excellent privacy tool. However, uBlock Origin is not a replacement for Privacy Badger (nor is Privacy Badger a replacement for uBlock Origin).

For more see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

That wiki page is a bunch of nonsense. For example:

>Redundant with Total Cookie Protection (dFPI)

https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

Click-to-active widget replacement, GPC/DNT enforcement, the ability to turn off uBO entirely for a website when you don't feel like dealing with it and then have PB take care of most problems automatically.

For more, see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

Is this particular to Privacy Badger? Or is it just how it works on Android?

Sorry about the breakages!

Just FYI, you can always disable Privacy Badger on a particular site by using the "Disable for this site" button in PB's popup.

You can also help make PB better by using the "Report broken site" button in PB's popup.

PB is different from other extensions and works well with ad blockers. If you like what PB does, feel free to keep using it.

For more, see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

What doesn't Privacy Badger cover? (Yes, Privacy Badger is not an ad blocker but it works well with ad blockers.)

Manual blocking with uBO is hands on. Privacy Badger is (mostly) hands off.

For more, see https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

We're working on this feature now! Privacy Badger will automatically opt you out of common cookie consent banners, when opting out is an option.

Sorry about the breakages!

Just FYI, you can always disable Privacy Badger on a particular site by using the "Disable for this site" button in PB's popup.

You can also help make PB better by using the "Report broken site" button in PB's popup.

PB is another layer of protection on top of Firefox and Edge. Totally different list generation approach, widget replacement, etc.

Installing PB is easier (and more powerful) than configuring the browser for better protection. For example, Firefox doesn't block much by default.

https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

Hey, that's such a nice response, I appreciate it.

I think the thing on uBO's side is here on https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock :

>Do NOT use uBO with any other content blocker. uBO performs as well as or better than most popular blockers. Other blockers can prevent uBO's privacy or anti-blocker-defusing features from working correctly.

My perspective:

- uBO is good enough by itself

- PB is good enough by itself

- uBO comes with unique features

- PB comes with unique features

- While using uBO with PB may indeed cause some problems like anti-blocker-defusing features to break, it doesn't seem like a big deal for most people

- uBO alone is good, PB alone is good, uBO + PB is also good

>both authors of both apps state so.

I am Privacy Badger's author.

https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

https://privacybadger.org/#How-is-Privacy-Badger-different-f...

Nah, Privacy Badger and uBlock Origin do work well together.

That wiki page is nonsense.

>Redundant with Total Cookie Protection (dFPI)

https://privacybadger.org/#Is-Privacy-Badger-compatible-with...

I suggest expressing your support on their forum!

https://orionfeedback.org/d/9535-extension-privacy-badger-br...

A better, more-to-the-point title might be the following quote from the post:

>Safari makes it extremely difficult to use a custom search engine that's not in Safari's defaults.

(Yes, I know about this site's title guidelines.)

>some functionality couldn't make it to his MV3 adblocker

One of the things that didn't make it is the entire request control dashboard. No more granular reporting or controls, at all. No more "medium mode" or "hard mode" (blocking unknown domains by default and making exceptions as you go). Sure, if you didn't use it before, you won't miss it.

Google can keep talking about user safety all they want but their talk is hollow because:

(A) Chrome Web Store is full of malicious extensions. Google doesn't appear interested in consistently enforcing their own policies.

(B) Requiring DNR does nothing about all the other avenues for stealing user data. The fundamental problem is that a totally safe set of extension APIs is a totally limited set of extension APIs. No real innovation or differentiation is possible.

Yeah I get it, but I think we're talking past each other. You're a knowledgeable user and the new APIs made it possible not to worry about uBlock getting hijacked. I'm an extension developer, and I see an appalling disconnect between what Google says and the reality of Chrome extensions and Chrome Web Store for regular (non-technical) users.