From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Jul 15 16:49:04 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49436B99498 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:49:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brandon.wandersee@gmail.com) Received: from mail-it0-f47.google.com (mail-it0-f47.google.com [209.85.214.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13C7A1637 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:49:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brandon.wandersee@gmail.com) Received: by mail-it0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f6so23265293ith.1 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:49:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=JitQ92G97Al0myRGw1c+odmbu7XsLSk8O68bkNdAYh4=; b=m1+dfTnpmx7OOzTid1LMRvPA/m9nKxFwNUYJbvqOOpmKTlL5DJx5G9vLGwxZcjofDZ 5e5LkKvl5VX444QXcUlUhN8WCmrCMqtdBSDBQBevKWGf4nb2zM+B5/fC9ZWyHh5jT1J/ 7qX1W++eRLogkQhGwJKIjmpczg2LiKaans/eyUwup1i2mbs09GWNS9EwIKBpy/ugAATN hEjWh+gIYfIPx+sHN4vC0QvV0eXKO7YXXGyJdyPWC9LREoDB5656++7NOLWLb0F9VXeZ 8nwFRODpUpCPiyGheRGIjEhX0uyZyaxfg/WTy0wvr5fFAN5P3T0h2r4TkjKDOy2D99Ux 4MhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKSnjyOJ9hSFV3wQFZc2oxtl9cv9T9OPSq4VjSmrOop8KUqSjMHWmdENXFhfEqsxA== X-Received: by 10.36.201.133 with SMTP id h127mr24298463itg.36.1468601342732; Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:49:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from WorkBox.Home.gmail.com (63-231-158-136.mpls.qwest.net. [63.231.158.136]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e63sm1802711ith.0.2016.07.15.09.49.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 15 Jul 2016 09:49:01 -0700 (PDT) References: <5e4a20fe-51a4-ac10-4f72-23fcc3d04c15@hiwaay.net> <20160714002117.224b64ae@archlinux.localdomain> <8cd76e2e-ed11-7b3b-be75-de6bb4dcc092@hiwaay.net> <20160714063744.snaqwdbmzhd4ndb5@dijkstra.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de> <86r3awnh1i.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <20160714220944.2f05391f@archlinux.localdomain> <86poqfohta.fsf@WorkBox.Home> <5798a075-66eb-dc37-729b-ba8e72f2e1df@hiwaay.net> <20160715064517.15ffaa62@archlinux.localdomain> User-agent: mu4e 0.9.16; emacs 24.5.1 From: Brandon J. Wandersee To: Ralf Mardorf Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: borderline OT fireox question In-reply-to: <20160715064517.15ffaa62@archlinux.localdomain> Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 11:49:00 -0500 Message-ID: <86a8hi979f.fsf@WorkBox.Home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:49:04 -0000 Ralf Mardorf via freebsd-questions writes: > However, Firefox's safe browsing de facto is Google's safe browsing > and the collected data does say much about people living in some areas. > > And therefore the claim "Google won't be getting anything from Firefox" > is a wrong claim. > > Other browsers have other pros and cons, I'm just referring to the > claim "Google won't be getting anything from Firefox". Seeing as the question was over Google getting readily identifying information from Firefox, I assumed my meaning could be inferred from that context. Obviously Google can and will "get something from" Firefox, since Firefox still allows people to use Google services. That still doesn't mean that Google is identifying *you*, Ralph Madorph or William A. Maherty III, by the things you type into the Firefox search bar. Firefox takes the words you type in and, when you hit Enter, passes them on to the search engine you use. The browser you use to perform the searches is of no consequence: as long as you use a search engine that records your past searches, those searches will be recorded *after* they are sent by the browser to the remote computer performing the actual search. I apologize for derailing this conversation. Privacy on the web is a worthwhile concern, but I've grown tired of the overwrought paranoia that accompanies that concern. To most of the world, including the people you meet every day, you are not Ralph Madorf. You are not William A. Maheffey III. You are a faceless number nobody cares about, and beyond your having a legitimate IP that counts toward advertising revenue or targeted demographic marketing, or socio-political studies, or your name matching up to the credit card number and address you enter when you make purchases with them, they don't care who you are or what you're doing on the Internet. The few people out there that do want to use potentially identifying information against you pose a problem, but the solution isn't to fight to keep all information that you fear could make you a potential target of some malicious entity a secret. That simply reinforces the idea that many practically harmless aspects of our lives actually should be hidden; that the mundane searches we perform are some weakness that can be exploited; that such exploitation is ultimately the fault of the exploited; and that the potential personal harm of that information outweighs the potential social good of the otherwise anonymous information it accompanies. And it's simply an impossible goal anyway. Perhaps I had a knee-jerk reaction to this thread and spoke out of turn. Sorry; I'll leave it at that and stop hijacking it. -- :: Brandon J. Wandersee :: brandon.wandersee@gmail.com :: -------------------------------------------------- :: 'The best design is as little design as possible.' :: --- Dieter Rams ----------------------------------