No need to remove the URL tracking parameters manually. 🥳

Firefox copy link without site tracking

      • faintwhenfree@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hmm, I agree with you 100%, but power of defaults is how big companies get average consumers. Maybe Firefox should make it default with a setting to turn it on?

        A setting titled “allow copying of tracking data”, a lot of people won’t allow.

        Fight fire with fire.

        • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This just:

          1. Encourages companies to try to work around it

          2. More importantly, possibly breaks important functionality

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s like saying GDPR encourages companies to try work around data protection, so it should not be implemented.

            • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not like that at all.

              Links support parameters for a reason, and I promise you that the main reason isn’t tracking. They can convey important info like the language, search parameters, a specific comment, etc.

              Removing them willy-nilly by default is going to cause issue sooner or later, and then people are going to blame Firefox for “not working” and are just gonna switch to Chrome because “it just works”.

              That’s not what we want is it?

                • LufyCZ@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah but the list is hardcoded. Collisions can happen.

                  Also, since it’s hardcoded, it’s easily gameable, and it will be gamed if too many people start filtering them out.

                  It’s a good start but a bad solution overall

      • theo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you wanted to do this and make it default, I believe you should be able to do so using userChrome.css. You won’t be able to change the text, but you can remove the old menu item.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m unlikely to use the menu button, I generally use Ctrl+C/Cmd+C. I’ll have to poke around and see if there’s an option to set that shortcut.

          • theo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t think you would be able to do this as ctrl+c copies what is highlighted rather than the actual link.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I just want a shortcut for “copy without tracking” on the current tab instead of having to use the context menu. I’m fine with it not being “Ctrl+C,” as long as it’s reasonably easy to remember, like maybe “Ctrl+Shift+C” or even a sequence of commands (i.e. select address bar, then special copy command).

              Likewise, there should be an easy way to open a link without trackers, like “Ctrl+shift+click” or something.

    • HiramFromTheChi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or at least the option to make it the default. I could see some situations where someone may want to test a link with non-identifying parameters (like identifying the campaign source), and not wanting to have that stripped from the URL by default.

      But I get you, from a consumer perspective I’d also want it as my default.

      In the meantime, there’s ClearURLs or uBlock Origin with filter lists.

    • Meldrik@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Doesn’t it just clean up the link or does Firefox actually know which part of the link to remove?

          • Blackmist@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Looks like it has a list of global and site specific parameters that it is safe to remove.

          • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think it’s a combination of things, a basic approach of removing the query string (after the question mark) with exceptions for different sites that might need some of the query string.

          • bitwolf
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Generally, most are variables prefixed with utm_

            They likely built an index from most of the Analytics services also.

    • corbin@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not the default because it can break links sometimes, like links that have authentication details in the parameters.

    • bitwolf
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There’s an addon I use for the Android version that does this by default.

      It does miss some queryparams though but it dramatically reduces the URL size for the big offending sites.

    • akilou@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      But default is putting your cursor in the address bar and hitting ctrl-c. How would Firefox clean it like that?

      • Euphoma@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If it removes the tracking from the link before the page loads, it could work. So it would already be clean when you copy it.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        On android anyway, that’s an interceptable action, and you can also monitor and alter the clipboard.

        So they could either alter what gets copied before its copied, or scan the copied item after it’d copied and alter it.

  • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    1 year ago

    Firefox user for many, many, many years. I tried chrome once and was dismayed at how sluggish it was, hogging ram & cpu.

    FF just gets better and better with every update. I’m amazed that more people aren’t using it.

    • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      At my school, firefox on the computers are not updated at all so it’s using the very old firefox. Even then, it’s not that slow. Now the current update is way more modern but it does have the weird stuff like pocket and very weird advertisements bookmarked on the front page. You’ll get a much better experience after you do all the adjustments of removing everything and installing the proper extensions, maybe a little arkenfox too.

      • Bleeping Lobster@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s interesting to hear. How come they aren’t updating?

        Tbh I don’t mind those ‘ads’ you speak of, not sure if we’re talking about the same thing because for me it’s mostly articles, often quite interesting stuff that I wouldn’t have seen elsewhere. Will have a look into arkenfox now as never heard of that

        • Vilian@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          i had i siminular problem in college, they used a program to “freeze” the wi dlws stage, so it reset the state in every boot, but they didn’t updated the pc in years

  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Here’s an amazon link both without and with that feature being used, for comparison. (The tracking one was created in incognito mode, because I don’t know what sort of things it might reveal about me otherwise)

    https://www.amazon.com/Bentgo®-Pop-Bento-Style-Compartments-Sustainable/dp/B0B3CLN8PX/?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_w=2B470&content-id=amzn1.sym.87cc8b65-1eb6-4676-be85-d0235c8cc1b4&pf_rd_p=87cc8b65-1eb6-4676-be85-d0235c8cc1b4&pf_rd_r=Z6KPA93RVDCTHA2HFQM7&pd_rd_wg=o2LTo&pd_rd_r=fef55702-5392-47a4-a5d2-8a7951d1229b&ref_=pd_gw_dealz_cm&th=1

    https://www.amazon.com/Bentgo®-Pop-Bento-Style-Compartments-Sustainable/dp/B0B3CLN8PX/?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=pd_gw_dealz_cm&th=1

    What do the parts it left on do? The encoding is innocuous enough but I don’t know what it’s doing with ref or th. I usually sanitize links myself and I’d have brought that one down to either

    https://www.amazon.com/Bentgo®-Pop-Bento-Style-Compartments-Sustainable/dp/B0B3CLN8PX

    or

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0B3CLN8PX

    , depending on how much I cared at the time. I kind of expected firefox to bring it down to the first version.

  • speaker_hat
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m curious whether this sweet feature alone will decrease data greedy websites revenue in $ millions

    • M137@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      As with most comments about most of these things, you have a very skewed view of the average user. The vast majority of people, even those using Firefox, will not be aware of this. And many that are aware won’t care to use it. It won’t make a noticeable difference unless it’s made default, and even then Firefox only has a small percentage of the browser market.

      I don’t understand how people like you seem unable to think past your very first reaction, you don’t need deep knowledge or anything to figure any of that out.

    • Contend6248@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Did you remove it or just switched the default to a different one?

      I think it getting added again might happen in updates, if they change defaults that’s a whole other beast

      Switching is enough for me and i didn’t had any weird behavior since years, beside the fullscreen VPN ad they did once

        • brianorca@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Try switching the default before removing the others. If the others get added back, the default should start the same. If you just remove them, it might not update the default. (Because then it’s just showing you whatever is left over when it can’t find the default.)

    • dubyakay@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sucks, but they do this periodically yes. Google affiliation is a good revenue stream for them.

    • HiramFromTheChi@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      As of this writing, it doesn’t look like it.

      As @SatyrSack@lemmy.one here mentioned, URLChecker is a good way to manipulate a URL before opening it.

      • Firestorm Druid@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It does look like a really good app and idea, but I’m wondering if it’s really necessary on mobile devices. Usually, I don’t go around clicking on all kinds of links I shouldn’t, so I’m wondering what exact purpose it accomplishes. Genuinely looking for input here.

        • HiramFromTheChi@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          If anything, URLCheck is even more necessary on mobile devices, particularly iOS where Firefox is just reskinned Safari. On Firefox for Android, you could install the ClearURLs extension, or use uBlock Origin filter lists.

          With that said, there are other use cases. For example: Friends or family might share URLs from social media. They often contain unique identifiers that you can strip before clicking the link by using URLCheck.

          More on this here: https://a.lemmy.world/lemmy.world/post/8443034

          • Firestorm Druid@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Good points. I was under the impression, though, that the extension doesn’t exist for mobile Firefox yet.

        • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It prevents apps from opening links in your browser directly, since they have to go through URLCheck first. Let’s say you click a link in your email, and instead it opens a “google.com/url?q=https://amazon.com” or a “safelinks.outlook.com/?url=…” instead of just taking you to Amazon.com. URLCheck will get rid of the unnecessary redirection and allow you to go directly to the site.

          Adding onto that, my pet peeve with email links is them showing you a link that says Amazon.com, but then you go to click the link it opens a bunch of email tracking links before finally taking you to Amazon.com. With URLCheck you can actually stop these links from opening, and go to the website directly in the browser yourself.

          If you’re familiar with that issue that popped up regarding “.zip” domain names, and how they can be engineered to look like an official URL, this is a non issue as you’ll get a warning if any link contains malicious unicode characters that could be mistaken for something else

          Also, if you have multiple apps that can handle a link (maybe different youtube apps like libretube, newpipe, grayjay), you can pick which one to open after clicking a link. Android does have a stock app picker, but it’s very easy to mistakenly set an app as default.

          Android apps can also track what apps triggered them to open - URLCheck can mask this, and even set some advanced flags for how the link handler app should be opened.

          To be honest after using it for a while, I really wish there was something similar available for desktop

    • corbin@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      On Android you can install LinkCleaner as a PWA using a chromium browser, it will show up as an option when sharing a link from Firefox or any other app.

  • kratoz29@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can someone ELI5 what is the difference with normal link sharing?

    Does it change for the end user something or what? I ask because I almost never share stuff from my browsers, but I do from some apps such as social media or Sync for Lemmy/Voyager.

      • sfgifz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Indeed, but it’s true - Brave did bring this feature long ago. It’s a good thing for us, let multiple browsers try to one up each other on privacy focused features.

        • gila@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s true, this was one thing that was slightly annoying when I made the move from brave to Firefox. But I mean, I wouldn’t really characterise this as a reliable security feature. If you don’t manually check your URL before hitting return anyway, you’re going to be less secure than without the feature

  • RickyRigatoni@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is there an about:config setting to make this the default action or are we gonna have to be patient for that?

      • pixelscript@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        Pretty sure they are asking, “Why would I ever want the tracking copied, why is this relegated to a bespoke option instead of being the default behavior?”

        • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s good to have a normal copy along with this remove tracking one. In case for some reason removing tracking messes something up with the link and makes it not work. It’s always nice to have options rather than just doing it automatically.

          • andyMFK@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            agree with you about having options, but swap it around. have copy without trackers be “copy link”, and then have an option “copy link with trackers”

    • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The fact is that there is no surefire way to get rid only of tracking parameters, because they can mix in with other legit ones that if removed would break the website you’re visiting.
      Last I heard, Facebook had rolled out some encrypted URL parameters, so the collective mapping efforts to manually identify parameters only used for tracking on each different website could very well be nullified if many implement something evil as that

  • lapommedeterre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Semi-off-topic, but is there anything like a smarter clipboard on Android that can remove tracking details on paste (would be different from a plain paste)?