Not from a privacy perspective, that's for sure. There are already a couple privacy downsides in federated services in general, but the decision to intentionally retain user data after deletion is requested... If that's the case, Reddit may offer more privacy
All the labels are just so nonsensical. I did a little bit of digging into how cross-site tracker blocking is implemented in Firefox, and it took me a while to realize that switching from Standard to Strict ETP in a fresh profile was all I needed to do to beat the EFF's test site.
But the options under ETP still confuse me. Take the Custom > Cookies section.
Blocking all cookies - makes sense
Blocking all third party cookies - ditto, only cookies from the current site will be allowed
Cookies from unvisited sites - this one is a little weird. So if I've been to Google once, does that mean I can get cookies from google.com but not ads.google.com?
Isolate cross-site cookies - so third party cookies aren't blocked, but for each site that uses the same third party, the third party cookie is different?
Cross-site and social media trackers - I have no idea. Sounds like the last one (which should cover everything?) and maybe block social media cookies entirely?!
There's also the "tracking content" which appears to be the only thing that is blocked in ETP strict but not ETP standard. I have to assume this is some blacklist of known tracking scripts or something.
It's a lot to wrap my head around. It really could use a checklist.
Do you think they accidentally updated the date of the post when changing some of the contents of the article? New sites saw it and reported on it again?
I like to think I'm on top of this stuff, but it definitely threw me for a loop too. Total Cookie Protection is a bit of a misnomer, so I can understand why people might have been confused.
Does this mean that desktop computers are sending (or at least can send) your Wi-Fi passwords from the OS into the motherboard firmware? I don't know if I want them to do this at all, but if they must, I hope it's being done explicitly.
I just realized there was actually a linked article and... The way they actually do it seems worse.
Eclypsium automated heuristics detected firmware on Gigabyte systems that drops an executable Windows binary that is executed during the Windows startup process.
This executable binary insecurely downloads and executes additional payloads from the Internet.
Okay, exactly how does a motherboard know how to request a file on the internet? Does it communicate with the drivers on the computer? And if so, wouldn't the drivers be responsible for the download, not the motherboard itself?
Maybe this is just splitting hairs, but I want to understand the process