Recommended Posts

Quote

Who is peeking over your shoulder while you work, watch videos, learn, explore, and shop on the internet? Enter the address of any website, and Blacklight will scan it and reveal the specific user-tracking technologies on the site—and who’s getting your data. You may be surprised at what you learn.

 

https://themarkup.org/blacklight?url=www.neowin.net

 

Quote

21 Ad trackers found on this site.This is triple the average of seven that we found on popular sites.

49 Third-party cookies were found.This is more than the average of three that we found on popular sites.

 

This is ridiculous guys. This is just more fuel for ad blocking this site.

Edited by Xilo

I always block third party cookies in any browser I use. I do have neowin added to my trusted sites in ublock origin and it's the ONLY site I do that with. They have to make money some how.

 

Never heard of that site you linked to, but will have to use it to check out other sites.

I don't know what they consider a "popular" website, but I tested a handful of other tech websites I'd consider popular, and they all have the same or more ad trackers (though some have fewer cookies). Either way, I'm not sure this is a completely reliable tool.

  • Like 2

Let's compare it to another popular tech site

 

SNAG-0003.png

 

To be fair lets compare it to another tech website like Neowin

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

So the question remains, what sites are doing "3x less" trackers? We also have a fully configurable opt in/out for cookies privacy at the bottom right of the page.

 

Fact remains, people aren't running this website out of their own pockets we rely on advertising, and yes we also rely on Google analytics so we don't have to spend money on resource intensive things like webalizer and such like, we even offset the site staff email to GSuite so we don't have to run an email server.

 

Last comparison:

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Even the mighty BBC is comparable to ours.

 

I also want to add that "popular" sites like facebook and google do not rely on 3rd party advertisers at all.. but that still does not mean your browsing with them is private.. so factor that in with the comparisons as well.

4 minutes ago, indospot said:

I don't know what they consider a "popular" website, but I tested a handful of other tech websites I'd consider popular, and they all have the same or more ad trackers (though some have fewer cookies). Either way, I'm not sure this is a completely reliable tool.

I tested several popular gaming websites. Destructoid for instance has 0 ad trackers, and only 3 third party cookies.

Just now, Steven P. said:

Let's compare it to another popular tech site

 

SNAG-0003.png

 

To be fairlets compare it to another tech website like Neowin

 

SNAG-0004.png

 

So the question remains, what sites are doing "3x less" trackers? We also have a fully configurable opt in/out for cookies privacy at the bottom right of the page.

 

Fact remains, people aren't running this website out of their own pockets we rely on advertising, and yes we also rely on Google analytics so we don't have to spend money on resource intensive things like webalizer and such like, we even offset the site staff email to GSuite so we don't have to run an email server.

 

Last comparison:

 

SNAG-0005.png

 

Even the mighty BBC is comparable to ours.

 

 

Just because other tech sites have the same problem, doesn't mean your site should. This is average across all sites people have submitted. If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?

 

2 minutes ago, Xilo said:

I tested several popular gaming websites. Destructoid for instance has 0 ad trackers, and only 3 third party cookies.

Just because other tech sites have the same problem, doesn't mean your site should. This is average across all sites people have submitted. If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?

Can you tell me how I would otherwise pay for the running costs then? Would you be prepared to buy an ad free subscription, like so many others aren't?

 

I think if we're along the same lines as the BBC which is part publically funded and also under UK government scrutiny, I sdon't think we look bad at all compared to windowscentral, which has 3x more advertiser tracking cookies and double the amount of trackers.

  • Steven P. changed the title to Neowin trackers and 3rd party cookies

I changed the misleading title, but I consider this topic asked and answered.

 

For openness I saved what the title used to be which was very misleading and untrue compared to our own sector of websites.

 

SNAG-0006.png

1 minute ago, Steven P. said:

 

Can you tell me how I would otherwise pay for the running costs then? Would you be prepared to buy an ad free subscription, like so many others aren't?

If you've struggled with the same problem for years, maybe it's time to rethink what you're doing? Getting rid of all the political BS would be a good start.

 

News sites are the worst for trackers and cookies though.

3 minutes ago, spikey_richie said:

You may have just guilt-tripped me into a sub @Steven P.

Well to be honest not ad blocking is just as good :)

 

I feel like if a person is posting about the amount of third party advertiser cookies then they are already blocking them and just posting this to justify their position, when what we are doing is actually perfectly normal across the web.

 

The Privacy tool isn't there for nothing, it serves a function too.

  • Like 1

My own site rates similar to Neowin and I'm mainly using Google Analytics, Google AdSense and Skimlinks. Compared to some sites in 2020 I think that's quite acceptable.

 

Its a double edged sword unfortunately, I can't say i'm 100% ok with the amount of data the likes of Google track. However the trade off is this allows many sites / communities to become self sufficient and freely available for anyone to access.

28 minutes ago, shockz said:

Do you see the data collected by third party? Or is it just sent over without any additional review?

I'm not sure how we can review all the data that's sent over. 

 

If you're curious as to the information collected, you can check it all out in the privacy options 😊

42 minutes ago, Biscuits Brown said:

Something must be wrong with that site because Google, Facebook and Twitter are suspiciously low to zero trackers or third party cookies. I find THAT hard to believe.

I think you'll find that the larger website won't have to rely on 3rd party services at all, if anything they are collecting the data themselves and then selling it to 3rd parties, and no I'm not being paranoid, that's exactly what companies like Facebook and Google are there for, data collection.

 

Part of the concern by the OP is actually the sort of data it sells like web analytics, it is free to Neowin so long as we're okay with Google using the data themselves such as where the hit came from, how many pages were hit, etc exactly the same data as webalizer would collect locally but nowadays you can't even get approved to review hardware without sharing some traffic data.

48 minutes ago, Steven P. said:

I think you'll find that the larger website won't have to rely on 3rd party services at all, if anything they are collecting the data themselves and then selling it to 3rd parties, and no I'm not being paranoid, that's exactly what companies like Facebook and Google are there for, data collection.

 

Part of the concern by the OP is actually the sort of data it sells like web analytics, it is free to Neowin so long as we're okay with Google using the data themselves such as where the hit came from, how many pages were hit, etc exactly the same data as webalizer would collect locally but nowadays you can't even get approved to review hardware without sharing some traffic data.

I don't know. Microsoft, Oracle and CNN were loaded with trackers and 3rd party cookies and I'd consider them 'larger' sites.  Still think somethings off if Facebook.com has zero trackers and on 3rd party cookie. 

11 minutes ago, Biscuits Brown said:

I don't know. Microsoft, Oracle and CNN were loaded with trackers and 3rd party cookies and I'd consider them 'larger' sites.  Still think somethings off if Facebook.com has zero trackers and on 3rd party cookie. 

it probably can't detect the trackers and such from Facebook because you have to be logged in for them to be active.

3 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

it probably can't detect the trackers and such from Facebook because you have to be logged in for them to be active.

It does track without a login. It's one of the central complaints about Facebook trackers. Anytime you see a Facebook share or like button on a site, or a pixel embed, it's tracking that user, whether or not they even use Facebook or not. 

I think that everyone is overlooking one simple thing: anywhere you go, you are tracked by something, a cookie, a script, etc. If you don't like it, don't visit the site, I think that it is fairly simple. Neowin has been a site I have used for years, and I do not worry about being tracked, why should I? I'm not doing anything illicit or illegal, so why do I care if a site can tell what I was looking at, what are they going to do with the data, besides the fact that the amount of data that a website would receive in 24 hours would be allot! I really doubt that the website owners/operators have the time to sift through all the collected data!

  • Like 2
  • Facepalm 1
16 hours ago, shockz said:

It does track without a login. It's one of the central complaints about Facebook trackers. Anytime you see a Facebook share or like button on a site, or a pixel embed, it's tracking that user, whether or not they even use Facebook or not. 

I'm just talking about the facebook.com main page though; I doubt there are trackers/ad-cookies on the login page which is where that scanner would be probing. That's just my thought on why it "appears" to be so low according to that scanner site.

 

I don't disagree with you about facebook's trackers on other sites, they're worse than Google IMO with the amount of tracking they do. Heck I'd take Chinese tracking over Facebook's lol

On 27/10/2020 at 03:22, Xilo said:

If you've struggled with the same problem for years, maybe it's time to rethink what you're doing? Getting rid of all the political BS would be a good start.

 

News sites are the worst for trackers and cookies though.

Not everyone feels that way with the political topics. They are also only available to members and even then people aren't forced to read those threads.

 

I pay for a subscription due to those topics and the funny pictures threads. I doubt I would pay just for the tech articles as Neowin doesn't offer anything that several other tech sites don't offer.

The forums with the various and wide ranging topics are what makes this place worthwhile for me. Just my opinion.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Yup, that's a doozy right there 😄
    • It's a bundle of tools created by a variety of people, so things can go wrong sometimes. It's a great addition to Windows, and I use a lot of the tools on a daily basis. Also, it's still a 0.**** release so quick updates are to be expected 😉
    • Oh, I did. And it's even worse than I was hoping! Besides a lot of techno-babble jargon (yes I understand 100% of it but it's still all just techno-babble) there's 2 key points that make me super-weary about even considering testing this out. -- By default, after installation, a relay is automatically set up, so you do not need to care about that. * Non-chatmail apps use email servers as a long-term message archive while chatmail clients use email servers for ephemeral instant message relay. * Supporting the full variety of classic email setups would require considerable development and maintenance efforts, and complicate making chatmail-based messaging more resilient, reliable and fast. -- Basically, the end-user device is the 'server' (relay) so there is NO ARCHIVING whatsoever because every message is necessarily ephemeral. Great for techno-paranoia (and for illicit activities preferring no tracks to cover) but terrible for everybody else. It's also ironically contradictory to engineering principles of redundancies besides the transport layers due to the explicit absence of any persistent storage. Instead of 'classic email address' retaining multi-GB messaging archives on its server, now every device must retain 100% of those storage demands. (Email messages were originally meant to be short correspondences, not the multi-MB attachments boondoggle that now exists with unlimited spam engines flooding every potential recipient.) Any device swap or reset (or loss) makes the entire message history go bye-bye forever... lest there's an off-device auto-archival "relay" mechanism that's really a separate server that holds onto all transported messages (an email server) that utilizes 'chatmail email address' identities (like an email server) and its own persistent storage archive (like an email server). But... this solution is hoping to exist alongside real-world email address identities (based on the email server relay pathway) but simply render messages in chat thread format in an ephemeral manner (with contents being encrypted, and messages auto-expiring) ... In the end, it's a chat app/experience for the Web3/P2P-at-all-costs zealots. (I have accts on all sorts of federated web3 services so I understand the technical and non-technical alike.) For any practical users, however, it's just another service to download/install, register, cross-share id cards/qr codes, but know that there's no history/archive whatsoever (by design) so no account/message recovery whatsoever... update the device, install a bummed update patch, or dare upgrade your device... all history, poof, gone. Ya gotta start everything over again like they're a brand new person.
    • You've tried DuckDuckGo and Brave Search, now get serious with SearXNG by Paul Hill Over the last decade, it has become quite trendy to dump Google Search in favor of privacy-preserving alternatives such as DuckDuckGo, Startpage, and Brave Search. These search engines have done a very good job at highlighting dodgy practices by Google, such as adjusting search results based on what it thinks you’ll like (filter bubble) and stalking you around the web to advertise to you. While these search engines are good starting points when compared to non-private services like Google, there are still quite a few issues with them. For example, both DuckDuckGo and Brave Search require running non-free JavaScript in your web browser, which is comparable to running proprietary software on your computer, meaning you can be sure about what it’s actually doing in the background. Another issue is that these search engines are hosted on the respective companies’ servers, and you are using a service that you don’t control. Finally, DuckDuckGo, while offering privacy features, relies heavily on Microsoft’s infrastructure for its results and, in the past, has permitted Microsoft tracking scripts. If you are looking for a more private search solution than DuckDuckGo, Brave Search, and Startpage, then I recommend taking a look at SearXNG. It is a privacy-respecting metasearch engine that can be used via different public instances, which is useful for mobile users, or you can install it on your computer or server and run it locally with maximum control. Unlike Google, Bing, or Brave Search, which crawl the web and have their own search indexes, SearXNG is a metasearch engine, meaning it taps other search engines, stripping your identifying data, such as IP address, user agent, and cookies, in the process. Your search query is sent to the other search engines you enable before aggregating the results. SearXNG has deployment flexibility. If you are a casual user or a mobile user and don’t want to run SearXNG locally, you can use a public instance that is hosted by someone else. The main problem with this is that you are putting trust in the maintainer of the instance regarding stuff like logs that they may keep; good hosts should have a privacy policy explaining their policies. If you are trying to use SearXNG, you can also install the software on your device and then head to 127.0.0.1:8080 in your browser and search from there. While you don’t have to worry about a third-party admin like the public instances, search engines could ultimately block your IP address if they frown on you pulling in their search results locally. If you want to run it locally, it’s a good idea to use proxies or VPNs to hide your actual IP. You don’t have to worry about this with a public instance, as search engines never see your IP address. The main privacy benefit of using SearXNG is that it isolates your identity from the underlying engines that it’s capable of searching, such as Google and Bing. These search engines will only see requests coming from a generic server, so they can’t profile you and create a bubble filter that influences what results you see. This also ensures that your search engine doesn’t turn into an echo chamber that prevents you from reading alternative points of view. As a free software project, you are allowed to inspect SearXNG to make sure there are no negative features bundled inside. This sets it apart from the privacy search engines mentioned earlier because you can’t check their source code. As a meta search engine, you are not restricted to getting results from one source. Due to the fact that it scrapes content from other websites, your SearXNG instance will periodically get blocked from different providers, so it’s good to select a range of sources as a backup. While enabling all of the services will give you great results, this can make searching slower. I am personally happy with slower searches for the best results, but you can always check which providers are slowing down your search from the search results page and disable them to speed things up. If you want decent results quickly, enable the main search providers such as Google, Brave, DuckDuckGo, Qwant, Bing, and Yahoo. This way, you get wide coverage without the latency. On the Engines tab in Preferences, do note that there are different tabs, such as General, Images, and Videos, with their own providers that can be toggled and are not covered by "Enable all" while on the General tab, so be sure to dig into each. Just a note, if you want to enable everything, press "Enable all" in one tab, then hit save at the bottom of the page, then do the next tab, and so on. If you press "Enable all", then do that in each tab, and then save, nothing will stick. When I had just some of the search engines enabled, I searched “define nefarious” and results came back with the definition of “define” - obviously that was a sucky result. However, when I had everything enabled, it found dictionary pages for the word “nefarious” and even had an inline definition on the sidebar, which is quite nice too - that was delivered by WolframAlpha for anyone wondering! Probably the worst thing about this meta search engine is that the engines you select are saved with a cookie, so you must enable them on every new device you use SearXNG on, including if you decide to go into incognito mode with your web browser. Honestly, I would say this is the most annoying aspect, and perhaps if your browser lets you choose a separate private browsing search engine, then it would be best to use DuckDuckGo for this portion of your browsing. Another weakness of SearXNG is the random blocking of it by search providers. When you are on the results page, expand the “Response time” box, and it will show things like “Suspended: too many requests” or “access denied”. This is why it is good to enable several providers so that there is always a fallback to get results from. I won’t pretend SearXNG will be for everyone, however, if you enable all of the providers and put up with the slower response time, the results can be really amazing. Even if you don’t want to use it as your daily driver, keeping a bookmark handy that links to it is a good idea if you ever feel like doing a deep dive into a niche topic where other search engines are just failing to bring up any good result, due to the amount of sources it looks on. If you’re interested in radical user control over the software you use, installing SearXNG locally can also be a good idea, but be prepared to be temporarily blocked from sites if you trigger bot sensors without a VPN. Personally, I’ve opted to use a public instance, rather than install it myself. If you want to use it via a public instance, head over to searx.space to find a provider. Let us know in the comments if you have used SearXNG or its predecessor, Searx. What do you think about the quality of the results?
    • Dear Neowin, If it is not too much trouble, can you start using the new-ish designations for Insider Preview? "Experimental" is different than "former Dev" as it can apply to different models, eg 26H1 or 26H2 etc, right? No need to seed confusion IMHO. And, please "finally" update your graphics. OK?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      226
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      158
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!