762

AI Summary:

Overview:

  • Mozilla is updating its new Terms of Use for Firefox due to criticism over unclear language about user data.
  • Original terms seemed to give Mozilla broad ownership of user data, causing concern.
  • Updated terms emphasize limited scope of data interaction, stating Mozilla only needs rights necessary to operate Firefox.
  • Mozilla acknowledges confusion and aims to clarify their intent to make Firefox work without owning user content.
  • Company explains they don't make blanket claims of "never selling data" due to evolving legal definitions and obligations.
  • Mozilla collects and shares some data with partners to keep Firefox commercially viable, but ensures data is anonymized or shared in aggregate.
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] psyspoop@lemm.ee 99 points 1 day ago

Mozilla says that “there are a number of places where we collect and share some data with our partners” so that Firefox can be “commercially viable,” but it adds that it spells those out in its privacy notice and works to strip data of potentially identifying information or share it in aggregate.

Sounds like they've already been selling (or trading) data and this whole debacle is a way to retroactively cover their asses.

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Yeah. And their privacy notice is basically a mix-match of ten or so sections that have no place in a web browser privacy policy, that allows them to do the things people reproach them for doing.

It's like saying "we're not doing that, because we're limited by that document that allows us to do just that". And now they're tripling down on it.

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 12 points 1 day ago

google is probably thier number one customer for the data.

[-] justlemmyin@lemmy.world 112 points 1 day ago

Ruh roh. Too late though.

Friendship ended with Firefox,❎ Librewolf is my new best friend. ✅

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 49 points 1 day ago

Friendship ended with Firefox,❎ Librewolf is my new best friend. ✅

A big problem with such forks (same with packages made by Linux distributors) is that there is a delay between official FF release and the release of the corresponding update of the fork. 99% of the time this doesn't matter much but when there is a severe security issue, the patch needs to be available ASAP.

Past enshittifications of Firefox could be disabled by users. Users who know what to disable don't need such forks then.

I'm not yet clear what Mozilla even intends. Is it just an adjustment of language of things that are already in FF and can be disabled easily? If so, I just keep the following shit disabled and benefit from earlier update releases.

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

I have not dug too deep into it for now (especially if I end up changing browser), but even with everything in the preferences disabled, examining the content of about:config gives a lot of telemetry.whatever.enabled left to true, sometimes with names that do not seem to match any option given to the user. That's not a good look either.

[-] Kausta@lemm.ee 4 points 1 day ago

And you cannot change those in the default mobile Firefox since about:config is disabled (by their claim that it may break stuff in the ui)

[-] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 11 points 1 day ago

The issue is that Mozilla is actively hiding these settings. There's one (I forgot which one) that you can't find by searching for the title in the FF settings, you have to scroll to it yourself.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

The issue is that Mozilla is actively hiding these settings.

They are under "Privacy", just as I expected where they would.

There’s one (I forgot which one) that you can’t find by searching for the title in the FF settings, you have to scroll to it yourself.

🤷

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Yes, you can disable the settings that are exposed to you with a checkbox. How about all the other that have no checkboxes and you can find by snooping around in either the code or about:config ?

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

How about all the other that have no checkboxes and you can find by snooping around in either the code or about:config ?

Which are? Genuine question. I'm not aware of those either.

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

I'm not going to enumerate them, mostly because I did not keep track of which one was on and which one was off before messing all of them up. If you're curious, open "about:config" and search for "survey*.enabled", "collect*.enabled". Even with all settings disabled, some of them remains on, and they do cause traffic to the (documented) endpoints.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 62 points 1 day ago

They have no business collecting any data in the first place. If I wanted my data collected I'd be using Chrome like everyone else. I'm not choosing to use their buggy ass inferior and slower browser for any of Mozilla's services, I'm choosing it because I want to support non-Chromium browsers and regain my privacy.

There's no point whatsoever to using Firefox if it's just a worse Chrome.

[-] imecth@fedia.io 8 points 1 day ago

Telemetry benefits everyone, knowing which features are getting used, knowing what parts are causing crashes... It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind. I get that collecting data can be scary, because so far everyone has been busy selling that data. But there's a reason why data is so valuable, if it's properly handled and anonymized it benefits everyone using firefox.

[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

if it’s properly handled and anonymized it benefits everyone using firefox

glub glub much?

There is no justification for opt-out telemetry data collection, and there is no proper handling of data obtained despite user pushback. Also, properly anonymizing large data sets is not as trivial as you think. Even "fully anonymized" data set, assuming everything's possible's been done, can lead to correlation when added with other data. Even "cohorts" can lead to the creation of an aggregate group with so few individuals that it basically boils down to individual tracking.

Why do you think people are so vocal about not letting any of this happens in the first time? It's not for blind idealism. It's basically because even a minimum waiver on "supposedly anonymous" data is a huge blow to your privacy. And some people care about that.

Besides, Mozilla's been pushing for a shitton of features that are constantly blamed for Firefox becoming as bad as its competition, and constantly turned off/removed. If they cared even a tiny bit about user feedback, the last… 3, 5 years of decisions from Mozilla would have been very different. Feature usage telemetry is a joke to make people accept their bullshit; the only thing that influence feature development is management or very heavy pushback, and that happens in dev issues, not with telemetry feedback.

[-] imecth@fedia.io 13 points 1 day ago

glub glub much?

That's a nice way to start and end a discussion.

[-] grue@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

It's exactly the level of discourse your misinformation deserved.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] prole 4 points 1 day ago

It lets developers target what to improve and fix instead of going in blind.

I'm sure they'll make do

[-] gamer@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago

I think it'd be less creepy if there was an easily accessible public dashboard displaying this telemetry. E.g. like counters showing how many people hide the bookmark bar. If you can instantly see what data your browser is sending in an easily digestible format (ie not a dump of JSON in a submenu), it's easier to gain a quick understanding of the benefits vs minimal privacy tradeoffs.

But it really depends on trust: trust that they're not collecting more than they claim, and trust that the data is properly anonymized. Mozilla has lost that trust.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zak@lemmy.world 40 points 1 day ago

Great, but a web browser still does not need terms of service. There's no ongoing relationship between the user and the creator of the browser, at least, there shouldn't be unless the user signs up for additional optional services.

It's great if Mozilla wants to offer some optional services users can opt in to, and those services probably need terms. I use Firefox Sync, though I've started to reconsider that given the recent fuss. The browser itself? I'll move to a fork first, and stop recommending Firefox to others.

[-] KayLeadfoot@fedia.io 14 points 1 day ago
[-] acutfjg@feddit.nl 15 points 1 day ago

Too late. I've already moved to another browser

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Jocker@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 day ago

Mozilla is soo stupid!

Most Firefox users use it only because of the values it upholds, and now they decided to destroy it. MF wouldn't even have any any revenue once they betray their little existing users!

If they're throwing away their values, then there is no reason to use Firefox anymore, BECAUSE OBJECTIVELY FIREFOX IS INFERIOR TO CHROMIUM.

And hopefully this accelerates development and support to fully alternate browsers.

[-] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 1 day ago

Wait, you think using Firefox somehow results in them getting money?…

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2025
762 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

63746 readers
2971 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS