• 87Six@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Install “I still don’t care about cookies” on Firefox based browsers.

    Cookies are declined immediately and the banners closed. Works most of the time unless it’s a custom non-standard cookie prompt implementation.

    You’re welcome.

    • Gloomy@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      It dosn’t delete cookies. I use ‘Cookie Autodelete’ for that togehter with ‘I still don’t care about cookies’, which is the community version of ‘I don’t care about cookies’. It is much better at removing the Popups.

      • Observer@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        For those wanting more information, the extension description states:

        This add-on will remove these cookie warnings from almost all websites!

        In most cases, the add-on just blocks OR hides cookie related pop-ups.

        When it’s needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what’s easier to do).

        It doesn’t delete cookies.

  • Imhotep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Why oh why didn’t the lawmakers add an obligation to use a standardized cookies selection popup.

    I remember day one of it coming into effect and it was already obvious this was a necessity.

    Lobbying. One of those laws pretending to do the right thing but sabotaged.

    Or maybe its even worse than that. Before you could just have the cookies deleted. But if you do that now you get the awful popup every time, so you just accept them in the end.
    I know I do.
    This law has made me accept cookies spying.

  • Qwel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    ublock has filter lists for these things. Doesn’t always work but helps a lot.

    the nice part is that if you don’t ever respond to the popup, they are not allowed to presume you accepted

  • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Should have been handled on protocol level. Cookies get priority levels, set browser to only accept required cookies and done. Everyone just wanted to do it the easy way… add a banner and ask the user… or dont even make the banner, call a third party library that does it for you… and has its own tracking code… yay!

    • ivn@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      These forms are actually about consent of tracking and cookies are just one of the ways to do tracking. You’re still consenting to tracking.

      Also Firefox Total Cookie Protection is a better solution for cookies. You should enable strict mode and Cookie AutoDelete does not work with Firefox strict mode.

  • Credibly_Human@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    I think people really misunderstand cookies and have been lead to get angry at exactly the wrong things which actually give the biggest companies huge advantages so they’re fine with all of this mumbojumbo.

    When you cant have local cookies, or there are hoops, companies that need not bother with this because they own your browser (Google) or companies that own major search engines (Google) or companies that most other companies rely on for ads or social media integration etc (Google) are tremendously advantaged.

    Now, basically only Google can collect a wholistic profile of a user, while regular websites must now waste extra man power implementing completely useless cookie preferences when in reality this should have been simplified, at worst, to 3 buttons.

    All, No Marketting, No Telemetry.

    Anything else is just the user wasting their time or destroying the functionality of a website for no reason/requiring busy body work to comply with ill conceived regulations.

    With the downfall of third party cookies in most browsers, cookies literally just serve as some temporary storage for websites on your local machine. Cookies existing or not existing arent what control whether you are tracked, especially given all the fancy fingerprinting that goes on nowadays.

  • drath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Settings -> Privacy and Security -> Enhanced Tracking Protection -> Custom -> All cookies (will cause websites to break)

    Open site -> it breaks -> do i really need it? (no) Move on to the next site. (yes) Ctrl+I -> Permissions -> Set Cookies - uncheck “Use Default” - Allow

    • devfuuu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      14 hours ago

      Been using it for a long time. In my experience it covers maybe 30 or 40% of sites only.

        • Localhorst86@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 hours ago

          The issue about that extension is how it handles consent.

          In most cases, the add-on just blocks or hides cookie related pop-ups. When it’s needed for the website to work properly, it will automatically accept the cookie policy for you (sometimes it will accept all and sometimes only necessary cookie categories, depending on what’s easier to do

          You should be aware that it will often just accept all cookies, because that is easier.

    • FishFace@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Gdpr seemed like it was designed to ban this, but lately companies (especially German ones?) seem to be trying this. I guess it won’t be resolved without a big, slow, expensive court case.

    • Lena@gregtech.eu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Was it The Sun (the shitty tabloid)? I’ve seen people get that on it.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Presumably because no one is actually prepared to pay to read the sun. It’s not like it contains any actual news anyway.

      • Björn@swg-empire.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        15 hours ago

        It’s on many German sites. One of them the tech news site heise.de that regular reports on court rulings deeming the practice illegal.

      • arudesalad@piefed.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        14 hours ago

        It feels like every uk news site does it. The guardian and the independent are the ones I have trouble with the most. Reader mode “fixes” it though.

    • evilcultist@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I keep seeing this a lot lately. I also saw one that had the style from the image (accept all or refuse maybe), but if you hit refuse, a second one popped up that said:

      [pay to read]

      Or

      [read for free]

      I opened it in private mode and read for free just let me into the article. I’m guessing it accepts all.

  • Katana314@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    17 hours ago

    I need to verify this, but I vaguely remembered you’re supposed to be able to exit these safely in two clicks maximum, though they sometimes obscure it.

    Usually, it’s something like “Customize” then “Save” without checking anything, or just “Reject All”.

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      16 hours ago

      it’s even more straight forward than that; accepting and rejecting has to be the same number of steps.

    • Opisek@piefed.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Correct. But companies seem to not give two fricks about it. There should be harsher punishments in place.

    • Baron Von J@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I’ve seen a few sites set the toggles so that the on position is for options out instead of allowing the use of.