
The New and Improved Privacy Badger 2.0 Is Here - Garbage
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2016/12/new-and-improved-privacy-badger-20-here
======
tdkl
User gitarr on reddit[1]:

1) Privacy Badger maintains a separate, plain-text list of every domain you've
ever visited:
[https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/1064](https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/1064)

2) Every time you start Firefox, Privacy Badger will connect to a IP on port
443.
[https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/1065](https://github.com/EFForg/privacybadger/issues/1065)

[1]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5i7st0/the_new_and_i...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/5i7st0/the_new_and_improved_privacy_badger_20_is_here/db6curs/)

~~~
StavrosK
How do we expect Privacy Badger to learn from domains we've visited if we
won't let it store a list of domains we've visited?

~~~
peteretep
Hashing

~~~
StavrosK
Give me a hashed list of all the domains you've visited and I'll tell you how
effective that is.

~~~
koliber
Could you not use an adaptive password hashing algo with an absurd iteration
count. Let's say each hash takes 500ms. Salt each domain with a different
salt.

Building a rainbow table would still be possible, but hindered. To discover
one domain behind one hash, you would need to roughly run through half of the
used domains with the slow password hash.

That being said, the subset of popular domains is much smaller then the full
set of domains, so the problem can be pared down to be much more effective
than the worst-case.

~~~
StavrosK
Yes, you could, and page loads would take 500ms _per resource_ just to decide
whether it should be blocked or not.

------
SeanDav
If ads did not track me, did not suddenly blast loud sounds at me, did not
flash portions of the screen at me, did not open new windows or tabs, did not
try hijack my machine or install malware and generally behaved like good net
citizens, I would be quite comfortable with seeing ads in most areas.

~~~
Flimm
The beauty of Privacy Badger is that it does not block ads, instead it blocks
anything that could track, based not on a centralized list, but based on
websites' behaviour.

------
boobsbr
So, as a completely uninformed user, what's the advantage of Privacy Badger
over Ghostery? Or do they complement each other?

~~~
dabber
From the download page: "Although we like Disconnect, Adblock Plus, Ghostery
and similar products [...] none of them are exactly what we were looking for.
In our testing, all of them required some custom configuration to block non-
consensual trackers."

"algorithmic and policy methods for detecting and preventing non-consensual
tracking"

[https://www.eff.org/privacybadger](https://www.eff.org/privacybadger)

So I think the biggest difference is the algorithm it uses to "learn" what to
block as you browse.

Edit: Also, it doesn't block all ads. From the same source: "Because Privacy
Badger is primarily a privacy tool, not an ad blocker. Our aim is not to block
ads, but to prevent non-consensual invasions of people's privacy"

------
technojunkie
I see that the new PB2 has a way to block and prevent WebRTC from leaking my
IP. That's great.

Can anyone understand if PB2's implementation is enough that I can uninstall
this Chrome extension doing the same thing?
[https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-network-
lim...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/webrtc-network-
limiter/npeicpdbkakmehahjeeohfdhnlpdklia)

------
Accacin
I've moved to using Disconnect with uBlock Origin. Would there be an advantage
to using Privacy Badger instead of Disconnect?

~~~
acconrad
There is no point in using Disconnect if you have uBlock Origin. uBlock Origin
has a set of filters in it's preferences that includes all of the filters from
Disconnect. And you also do not need Privacy Badger if you have uBlock Origin.

www.privacytools.io recommends all the browsers and add-ons you could need to
stay safe and annoyance-free.

~~~
supergreg
I use uBlock Origin together with Privacy badger. It can block cookies for a
domain while allowing you to load files, which I find useful, for example, for
reading disqus comments in a website.

~~~
anc84
Give uMatrix a try!

~~~
patates
I also recommend uMatrix. Ridding all the cookies while allowing some
resources with such granularity is very powerful. Also maybe scary for new
users, but give it a week and its usefulness will be obvious.

------
vilda
Decentraleyes is worth mentioning. Also save some bandwidth.

[https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/decentraleyes...](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-
US/firefox/addon/decentraleyes/)

~~~
StavrosK
Isn't the point of these CDNs that you only have to make the request once, and
then it's cached forever? What does decentraleyes buy you?

~~~
vilda
Few things

\- You request once _per CDN_. Common libraries are hosted on multiple CDNs
and you may simply load them from multiple locations. For example jQuery is
hosted by MaxCDN, Google, Microsoft, Cloudflare, jsdelivr.

\- Some CDNs may be temporarily down. It happened for me already multiple
times, including Google CDN and Cloudflare CDN.

