Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Ghostery’s results are (surprise) quite biased: http://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1kagfu/which_privac...


My results are not biased:

https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Comparative-...

Ghostery does a better job than Disconnect.


Not true. You’re changing Ghostery’s default settings but not changing Disconnect’s default settings.


For none of the extensions measured I had to go out of my way to set them in block all mode (mine is definitely still geeky compared to others -- it's more suited for the NoScript/RequestPolicy crowd).

I just re-installed all of them, and now I find they are all easier than ever to set up at install time. I had to tamper with Disconnect defaults months ago when I installed it, just like Ghostery and ABP. I appreciate it's no longer required.

If I adopt your arbitrary rule it would be pointless to do comparative measurements of privacy protecting power. I rather click once on a button at install time in a wizard (ABP, Ghostery) to be able to perform meaningful measurements than having to adopt a nonsensical methodology which would provide no useful information to end users.

Rather than dismiss the results, I think you should reproduce it and make a diff to find out what Disconnect doesn't block, and see how it can be improved. Maybe I will work toward finding more about this in the next benchmark.


> You’re changing Ghostery’s default settings but not changing Disconnect’s default settings.

I believe this was appropriately accounted for. "Ghostery and Disconnect were set in their respective equivalent of 'Block all trackers' mode."

https://github.com/gorhill/httpswitchboard/wiki/Comparative-...


lol




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: