• ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    This almost sounds like a hoax. But assuming it’s true… Install LibreWolf. It’s Firefox without the infuriating Mozilla stupid.

  • unskilled5117@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I haven’t looked into the technicals much further than the support page.

    The way i read it, it sounds like the companies will get some general data if their ads work without a profile about you being created. I would be fine with that. What I don’t like is the lack of communication to users about it being enabled.

    PPA does not involve websites tracking you. Instead, your browser is in control. This means strong privacy safeguards, including the option to not participate.

    Privacy-preserving attribution works as follows:

    1. Websites that show you ads can ask Firefox to remember these ads. When this happens, Firefox stores an “impression” which contains a little bit of information about the ad, including a destination website.
    2. If you visit the destination website and do something that the website considers to be important enough to count (a “conversion”), that website can ask Firefox to generate a report. The destination website specifies what ads it is interested in.
    3. Firefox creates a report based on what the website asks, but does not give the result to the website. Instead, Firefox encrypts the report and anonymously submits it using the Distributed Aggregation Protocol (DAP) to an “aggregation service”.
    4. Your results are combined with many similar reports by the aggregation service. The destination website periodically receives a summary of the reports. The summary includes noise that provides differential privacy.

    This approach has a lot of advantages over legacy attribution methods, which involve many companies learning a lot about what you do online.

    PPA does not involve sending information about your browsing activities to anyone. This includes Mozilla and our DAP partner (ISRG). Advertisers only receive aggregate information that answers basic questions about the effectiveness of their advertising.

    This all gets very technical, but we have additional reading for anyone interested in the details about how this works, like our announcement from February 2022 and this technical explainer.

    • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      My question is why Mozilla is trying to help advertisers at all instead of telling them to fuck off.

      • ahal@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Telling advertisers to fuck off works if your goal is to create a niche product tailored to people who care deeply about privacy already. But Mozilla is very much all about trying to make things better for everyone on the internet, regardless about their opinions (or lack thereof) on privacy and ads.

        Mozilla has recognised that advertising isn’t going anywhere, so there’s two options:

        1. Reject ads wholesale and become irrelevant.
        2. Push for a better alternative that can improve privacy while still keeping the engine that drives the internet intact.

        What other major player would ever push for privacy preserving attribution? Hint: no one. While I get that many people here want 0 ads (myself included), PPA is a great step in the right direction, and could have a huge positive impact if it’s shown to work and other companies start adopting it.

        And guess what? You can still turn it off, or use adblockers. Unlike Chrome, Firefox won’t restrict you in that regard.

        • ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Telling advertisers to fuck off works if your goal is to create a niche product tailored to people who care deeply about privacy already.

          Reject ads wholesale and become irrelevant.

          Absolute nonsense. How does rejecting ads or even including a default adblocker make Firefox any less relevant? I would hope most people would be more than happy to use a platform free from ads.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Have you used the Internet before? Or used it without a clue how services are usually paid for? You sound a bit clueless. The day they do that, a lot of websites stop working and nagging the user to turn off adblock, which I see all the time (as an advanced user who expects it). If I was a normie who didn’t understand this it might be quite confusing. This is obviously the reason basically no mainstream browser has done this or would do it.

            • yogurtwrong@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              Oh come on now everyone knows what an adblocker is. It’s right in the goddamn name: ad blocker, the thing that blocks ads.

              Even if they don’t know how to disable it they can just google it. And if they lack the skill to do that too, they couldn’t have succeeded installing Firefox in the first place.

              Stop trying to justify clearly unethical decisions because you used to like the entity who made the decision

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 months ago

                Understanding something doesn’t mean you support it. Sad so many people can’t understand this or how normal people operate.

      • kersplomp@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes. The problem with cookies was that they could be used to track and identify you. If this can’t do that, then what’s the issue?

        • minoscopede@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          The problem is supporting ad networks.

          Edit: /s because apparently it wasn’t obvious. Anonymous is obviously better.

        • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Most data can be de-anonymized with some clever tricks. I don’t know about Mozilla but the others definitely try to keep it just anonymous enough to later be correlated with the rest of your profile.

          Edit: typos