21
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by SIGSEGV@waveform.social to c/technology@beehaw.org

For those that don't know, Firefox has in-built support for automatically rejecting cookies and blocking the cookie banners from popping up.

To enable this feature, go to about:config, and perform the following:

  • change cookiebanners.service.mode from 0 to 2

To have this functionality in Private browsing mode, you should also:

  • change cookiebanners.service.mode.privateBrowsing from 0 to 2.

All Power to the People!

edit: (credit for this information goes to this lemming). Apparently, mode 2 means reject all or fall back to accept all if there is no Reject All button. Mode 1 only hits a Reject All button if available but ignores others.

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] erAck@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago

Careful, mode 2 means reject all or fall back to accept all if there is no Reject All button. So use that only if cookies are disabled or otherwise controlled, for example by an AddOn like Cookie AutoDelete. If not, rather use mode 1 that hits only a Reject All button if available but ignores others.

See https://community.mozilla.org/de/campaigns/firefox-cookie-banner-handling/ and https://github.com/mozilla/cookie-banner-rules-list

[-] abrahamisaninja@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

Oh boy this is great for privacy but it’s also going to break a lot of academic shit that relies on cookies for authentication

[-] james@lurk.fun 1 points 2 years ago

I don't think this blocks all cookies, but instead disables all non-essential cookies in those cookie consent dialogs

[-] zergling_man@lemmy.perthchat.org 2 points 2 years ago

So, firefox achieving feature parity with lynx? :^)

[-] SIGSEGV@waveform.social 1 points 2 years ago

CLI is king ;-)

[-] tom42@beehaw.org 2 points 2 years ago

According to Mozilla setting both to the value 1 is the better idea. The fallback then won't be "Accept all".

[-] Moonrise2473@feddit.it 1 points 2 years ago

I prefer an "accept all" approach, refusing all of them will lead to a degraded experience

Except abusers like Facebook who go in their dedicated isolated container

[-] deCorp0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 years ago

When mentioning data harvesting leviathans, Facebook is definitely on the list, but Google is the undisputed champ of surveillance capitalism. They’ve just got so many people addicted to their “free” services that most don’t want to mention it. I use Firefox mainly because it’s not Chromium based.

[-] SomeOtherUsername@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 years ago

Does "Reject All" also object to legitimate interest?

[-] noodlejetski@beehaw.org 1 points 2 years ago

or use Consent-O-Matic to automatically reject all the non-essential cookies https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/consent-o-matic/

[-] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 1 points 2 years ago

It’s good but nowhere near as good as I-Dont-Like-Cookies was. Shame that guy sold out. Consent-O-Matic still seems to miss a lot of consent screens.

[-] Tywele@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago

There is a community version called "I still don't care about cookies" https://github.com/OhMyGuus/I-Dont-Care-About-Cookies

[-] Engywuck@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This isn't anything new. Firefox lost the lead ages ago (thanks, Mozilla):

https://brave.com/privacy-updates/21-blocking-cookie-notices/

[-] pastelsquirrel@beehaw.org 6 points 2 years ago

a chrome reskin, cryptominer and the CEO's an anti-LGBT fascist. no thanks.

[-] Engywuck@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The cryptominer part is just FUD. Learn how it works. And the browser itself is way more private then FF by default.

The CEO was one also of the cofounders of Mozilla. How ironic.

Also, the actual CEO of Mozilla is doing a great job... At increasing her paycheck while firing developers:

https://itdm.com/mozilla-firefox-usage-down-85-but-why-are-execs-salary-up-400/2050/

Mozilla is one of the most corrupt orgs out there, right now.

[-] BuxtonWater@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Mozilla is one of the most corrupt orgs out there, right now.

Really? Compared to google, the banks, etc? You say they're one of the worst?

[-] pastelsquirrel@beehaw.org 4 points 2 years ago

dude's a Brave shill. ignore, block and move on.

this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2023
21 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37805 readers
74 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS