You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
-2

[–] 16352842? 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

Waterfox lures uninformed users with their privacy theater.

0
1

[–] TheTrigger [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Huh. With this, and your other comment (of which I visited the non-archived version, btw, just to make sure you aren't fucking with me), I have to say that you bring up some valid points. However, your article's critique is with lengthy, intentionally cryptic, misleading privacy advocacy/advertisement.

It's complaining about Facebook's 6,000+ words.
Do you know how many Waterfox's has? 784. (for reference: this comment has 540)
And it covers a lot of material.

Basically, what I'm saying is: it isn't written in alien-jew-lawyer-speak. Could they be more honest about what they do? Actually: not really. It's right there, in plain English. And, I mean, I'd like to think I'm not an idiot, but some of these provisions seem like a no-brainer:

Technical data for updates: Desktop versions of Waterfox periodically check for browser updates by connecting to Waterfox servers. Your Waterfox version, language, and device operating system are used to apply the correct updates. Mobile versions of Waterfox may connect to another service if you used one to download and install Waterfox.

Duh. How will it make sure you don't get the Ubuntu .deb, Chinese version older than yours, without revealing a little information? That seems obvious to me. Like, just by the very act of using such a feature, should one realize that said pertinent information will be sent.

Technical data for add-ons blocklist: Waterfox for Desktop and Android periodically connect to Mozilla to protect you and others from malicious add-ons. Your Waterfox version and language, device operating system, and list of installed add-ons are needed to apply and update the add-ons blocklist.

Okay, that's kind of fucky, and I don't like how I have to opt-out of it.

Webpage data to Google’s SafeBrowsing service:

Learn more or read Google’s Privacy Policy. Opting out prevents Waterfox from warning you of potentially illegitimate or malicious websites.

Understand it, don't like it. However: am glad that I am given the option to turn off.

Webpage and technical data to Certificate Authorities: When you visit a secure website (usually identified with a URL starting with "HTTPS"), Waterfox validates the website's certificate. This may involve Waterfox sending certain information about the website to the Certificate Authority identified by that website.

This is duh. Why wouldn't it? This is asinine to argue against. The website is telling you that this company gave it a certificate, authorizing its use: why shouldn't the browser verify that? It's lunacy to think this is a wrong thing to do.

You can perform searches directly from several places in Waterfox, including the Awesome Bar, Search Bar, or on a New Tab. Waterfox does not receive your search queries. Query data is sent to your search provider, which has its own privacy policy.

Search Suggestions: Waterfox by default sends search queries to your search provider to help you discover common phrases other people have searched for and improve your search experience. These data will not be sent if your selected search provider does not support search suggestions.

They've always been upfront about that. Their whole deal with Ecosia, etc. Nothing new here.

Dude, from reading that: nothing particularly stands out. I want you, specifically to tell me what you think is wrong about any of that. We just went through it point-by-point. So... enlighten me.