Lenny_Fox

Level 13
Verified
Without having tested them. Based on the technology used, this is my take on it.

They are based on the same Disconnect blocklist. Firefox additionally has 'containers' (explained here), Microsoft blocks more trackers from additional Disconnect categories and prevents website breakage by monitoring (tracking ;) ) the user engagement with a website (explained here).

Containers are a well known isolation principle used in Operating Systems. User engagement scoring is a well known metric in digital marketing. From a security/privacy point of view container mechanism is the best choice. From a useability/functionality point of view the engagement scoring mechanism is the best choice.

The container mechansim suits the technical/privacy aware user better and already is implemented today. In the long run the user engagement mechansme will be easier to to use and probably will provide better tracking protection (engagement scoring models will be more accurate using telemetry data and machine learning).
 
Last edited:

sdalgl72

Level 1
Interesting I don't use multi-containers didn't know they existed. Hence why the general question. Those articles were an interesting read, that said if Microsoft are doing a interaction score my noob brain here. If I frequent Google, YouTube, and Facebook just name the big ones won't that tranfer across to other sites for tracking? Or have I miss understood the way it works?
 

security123

Level 24
Verified
Interesting I don't use multi-containers didn't know they existed. Hence why the general question. Those articles were an interesting read, that said if Microsoft are doing a interaction score my noob brain here. If I frequent Google, YouTube, and Facebook just name the big ones won't that tranfer across to other sites for tracking? Or have I miss understood the way it works?
Container isolate websites so they can't see any other site data in your browser.
Beside that, with First Party Isolation (FPI) Firefox prevent sites from reading other sites from the same container.
Sadly the Chromium based browser don't have such container nor FPI.

FPI can be tested here:
Go to https://ritter.vg/misc/ff/fpi.htm
On first load it should say "There was nothing in local storage."
Now go to https://rittervg.com/misc/ff/fpi.htm
On first load it should say the same. If it says the same timestamp that was stored on the first page - it's not working.

And:
Thanks for diagnosing that for me, you're right blocking third party cookies does cause it to fail.
Both tests are equally valid. I just gave one because trying to be exhaustive about testing it would be mind-numbing. The test I provded only does localstorage, but FPI also isolates DNS cache, H2, image cache, favicons, cookies, localstorage, indexdb, etc etc
You can do yours by visiting https://anonymity.is/misc/ff/fpi-iframe.html

first; then visit the ritter.vg and rittervg.com links.
Source: Go to https://ritter.vg/misc/ff/fpi.html On first load it should say "There was... | Hacker News

So in Firefox you can use FPI, Multi-Container and also Temporary Container which provide best isolation but also less comfort.
 
Top