Discussion, talk and tips
https://forum.puppylinux.com/
is there a Puppy, browser or search engine that simply blocks/hides any sites that use cookies.
Most cookies are just linked to Google for tracking you cross site, cookies have in effect become spyware and if sites permit/promote such spyware I have no desire to visit them any more than any other site that might strive to distribute a virus.
This means you won't visit any web site anymore?
I never saw a web site NOT asking for setting up / use cookies.
Usually I refuse the use of cookies from a web site, if there's option to choose and/or to decline them.
However: the way I'm using Puppy, most of the cookies are gone after exiting the browser. After doing a reboot ALL cookies and the complete browser cache is gone!
I've rekindled my diligence with private browsing, usually in Chrome, Chromium, Firefox or Vivaldi.
Being compulsive following cookies (eg, Content Settings in Chromium derivatives), you can see it makes a difference.
You may expect to see them when you know they would be loaded and there are none.
All web sites want to use cookies.
Some will not work correctly if you do not let them use cookies.
The browser should have options for how you want cookies handled.
What browser??
Not all sites use cookies, yes 70%+ do, and more often that link to Google with a 'provide you a better service' type suggestion when they're just a means for Google to track your movements around the web so that they can better capture your 'profile'.
If sites permit the use of spyware (cookies linked to Google) I have no desire to support them any more than I would support other sites distributing viruses. If businesses want to maximise visitors to their site/product/service, then they shouldn't partake in such spyware activities. That many do - is their choice, I suspect more often they were likely conned into doing so not for their own benefit, but for Googles.
This addon will let you manage cookies per sites
https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix
There are different forks for different browsers (uMatrix/eMatrix/nMatrix), search the right one for you.
More about it here: https://digdeeper.neocities.org/ghost/a ... ml#umatrix
I've rekindled my diligence with private browsing
that seems to work. Some sites tell me I am not welcome. :thumbup2:
Fundamentally minimising Googles timelining of individuals, long term preservation of their movements, actions, online communications ...etc, where Google often also provides the DNS (so visibility of both the clear text and key encrypted streams - vastly simplifying key cracking) has the capacity to be massively abused if/when hacked either by loss/theft of the data, or by Google itself. In 10 years/whatever time when current security protocols are comparable to how 8 bit security was once considered 'secure', many might still have the same bank accounts/credit cards ..etc. and where the records may very well show where money came in from, where spent, where accumulated. Such visibility makes wealth no longer yours, its just a loan, subject to being 'confiscated' at any time.
Fundamentally its wrong to be stalked in everything you do, yes many accept that, often with the "I've nothing to hide" claim, but when their longer term timeline/records are used to attack them (likely in the financial sense) - it will be too late. Not caring about your data security is no different to not caring about your physical security. Whilst more often you'll get away with not having cared, at some point that can hit back hard. Or the hit might come in the form of being refused medical insurance, or a job - because your timeline profile threw out a mind or lifestyle profile that simply "didn't fit".
I suspect that much of the reason Google has been permitted to grow to the intrusive extent it has is due to it feeding into US government "security systems". That other governments haven't opted to ban that spying is indicative that Google may also be sourcing other governments security systems also.
Thanks for the pointer galbi. Not really what I was after however. More a off-shelf google avoidance desire. I already do have a setup that goes a long way down that path (that in part was formed from google blocking threads on the Murga board) - but seeking a more expert pre-built choice.
makes wealth no longer yours, its just a loan, subject to being 'confiscated' at any time.
so long as a government has the ability to tax your property and confiscate it for non-compliance, have you truly ever had ownership?
My isp utterly failed at maintaining their Email server, and subbed it out a google service quite a few years back. Email headers from isp customers still appears to be coming from the isp domain. If this practice is widespread, then you will have a hard time avoiding google, even should you avoid sending to Gmail recipients directly.
@rufwoof, going back to your original question using @galbi's links, this is a quick experiment you can try:
This will give you a block-all-allow-exceptionally policy browser. Use the ematrix UI (untested by me) to allow cookies vs CSS vs image vs ... on a per-domain base.
The comments at the end of galbi's ghacks link mourn umatrix (the giuhub project was archived last September) but also discuss best practices, and replacing umatrix with uBO's medium and hard modes.
More power to you if you can surf at all without cookies. There maybe a few oldie sites with static html, but they are few and far between anymore.
For some time now on both Firefox and Chrome/Chromium (or clones of either), I use combination of Ghostery (use custom setup as they are for profit and default settings may not be what you want) and Cookie Auto Delete addons. This accepts all cookies but destroys them immediately when you leave the site. Be aware with Cookie Auto Delete, once installed, you then have to check the box so it automatically does its job. You can whitelist sites if you want the cookies to be persistant. I have found this much more effective than the "delete all cookies on shutdown" option browsers give you.
I set Seamonkey to delete cookies on exit. I realize that's not quite the same as auto-boycotting sites that set cookies. Maybe some of the above comments will help in that regard.
I think more important for privacy concerns is blocking tracking scripts. If talking about Google, their scripts are nearly everywhere on practically every site, including bank and healthcare logins, and even on this forum when writing a post like this (ajax.googleapis.com produces the WYSIWYG editor function). Also all Captcha logins on the Internet now require google scripts. Googlestatic scripts provide the fonts now for most sites having user fill-in forms, and those font hits to google basically provide the text being entered.
So ruffwoof, if you are concerned about tracking, and if you don't already, you could run the NoScript addon for Mozilla browsers. Though supposedly not compatible with Seamonkey, I find it actually is, and have been using it for years. It makes visible all of the tracking scripts running on a site as you browse, and lets you choose which ones to enable either permanently or for the session only, and also lets you instantly revoke those permissions when not needed. It is important however to note the allowed defaults (whitelist) when you first install it and disallow any you don't want (I think google is allowed out of the box).
There is no perfect way to wade through the internet without being followed and profiled, but you can do a lot to reduce or thwart it. I don't think "having something to hide" is a primary reason for resenting and preventing tracking. I think it is a matter of protecting an important principle of individuality and protection from future misuse of collected data. With the rapidity of present commercial trends, I don't have much hope for the future of the Internet if these principles are ignored, or for personal security and individual rights.
Cookies are important, but don't forget about scripts.