this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2024
674 points (98.7% liked)

Privacy

31974 readers
391 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A cookie notice that seeks permission to share your details with "848 of our partners" and "actively scan device details for identification".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Consent-o-matic browser extension can handle a lot of cookie banners and automatically rejects all.

[–] filister@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Reject all is actually you agreeing on the legitimate interests loophole so this is also problematic.

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yea.. That is true. But I think, if uBlock blocks the banner, consent would not be able to reject/approve anything. Think of it as a fallback solution 😇well in my case.

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

But some pages stiff you by disabling scroll capability if you hide the banner

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

Yea, I tend to not use those sites and search for alternatives or archived versions. Sometimes you can scroll while reloading the page until scrolling is blocked again.

[–] MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Javascript is the problem there

[–] tetris11@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yep, but some pages load the text content programmatically, so even if you switch to reader mode you only get the blurb

[–] MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

Yeah they get skipped or opened on Brave incognito

[–] void_vortex@lemmy.ml 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I used to rely on Consent-O-Matic a lot, but I'm somewhat uncomfortable by the fact that the extension has full access to all web page content. I mean I understand why, but I'm still uncomfortable with it. In the end I ended up uninstalling it because it broke some sites so that they wouldn't load at all, or got stuck into an infinite reload loop. On majority of cases it works alright though.

[–] Petter1@lemm.ee 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Yea, every extension has full access to any website, if you not make use of a whitelist/blacklist.

[–] void_vortex@lemmy.ml 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Some extensions, such as SponsorBlock for YouTube actually limit themselves so they can only operate when the browser is on youtube.com. This can be declared in the extension manifest. It's a separate permission to access data on all web sites vs. access data on a specific website.

[–] xthexder@l.sw0.com 2 points 3 months ago

Not helpful when something like Consent-o-matic needs to operate on every possible website with a cookie banner.

I have had the same concerns, since watching it click through things faster than I can see is scary. Maybe some day someone sneaks in a cookie banner detector that activates on banking pages to steal your money? uBlock Origin has similar risks, but at least it's not actively controlling browser inputs.

[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 3 points 3 months ago

Oh alr thank you