Firefox is trying to gain back user trust with this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=O-xyNkvIB9g

This is a legit question: Should anybody trust Firefox again unless they put “we won’t sell your data” back into the privacy policy? I’m actually not sure if they haven’t already done so, let me elaborate:

https://brave.com/privacy/browser/ Brave: “We do not sell, trade, or transfer your information to any third parties.” This seems to obviously be in the legally binding text part. As is this one: “It’s Brave’s policy to not collect personal data1 unless it’s necessary to provide services to our users, or to meet certain legal obligations. We do not buy or sell personal data about consumers.” (Disclaimer: I’m not a lawyer.)

However, for Firefox it seems ambiguous to me, which worries me: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/#notice There is no appearance of “sell” in the entire privacy document, excpet for the top summary where i’m not sure if it’s at all legally non-binding.

Does anybody know if it is legally binding? If Mozilla were serious about it, why would they leave it ambiguous whether it is…?

Based on that, I’m not sure if Mozilla’s video about getting users back is worth trusting. I wonder if it’s just me.

Update for clarification: I’m not using Brave myself, and this isn’t a suggestion anybody should blindly do so.

  • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
    201·
    4 days ago

    They legally cannot state that they will not sell data, because - according to some states’ laws - things like “XX% of users utilise Google as their primary search engine” is already “selling user data”.

    Because they use user data to calculate that percentage, and it’s being used in relationship with Google who is paying Mozilla.

    • ell1e@leminal.spaceOPEnglish
      51·
      4 days ago

      If this one corner case is the reason, why doesn’t Mozilla put it into the legal text? I feel like the ambiguity hurts their position here. That Mozilla is silent about specifics in the legal text, seems rather scary to me.

      • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
        9·
        4 days ago

        Because it’s not one corner case. There are multiple - they have other sponsors and advertisers.

        • ell1e@leminal.spaceOPEnglish
          1·
          2 days ago

          I meant specifying the corner case of what exact type of data is shared, not an exhaustive list of companies it’s shared with that would inevitably go out of date.

          • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            1·
            2 days ago

            I meant specifying the corner case of what exact type of data is shared

            You mean this?

            not an exhaustive list of companies

            You mean this?

            that would inevitably go out of date.

            They, and everybody else who shares user data, are legally obligated to keep track of said data and have that published and available for both users and other companies.

            • ell1e@leminal.spaceOPEnglish
              1·
              13 hours ago

              “Technical data”, “Interaction Data”, very specific, uh-uh. (I’m being sarcastic.) The latter especially sounds like it can be literally a keylogger. Update: it isn’t, see response, but it e.g. seems to include all sites and sub pages visited which already seems fairly bad.

              I would love for Mozilla to fix this, which is why I try to be pragmatic and concrete. But so far, they don’t seem willing to do so.

              • Alaknár@sopuli.xyzEnglish
                1·
                24 hours ago

                I would love for Mozilla to fix this, which is why I try to be pragmatic and concrete. But so far, they don’t seem willing to do so.

                Here’s the problem - people don’t care if the information is there or not. Microsoft has been disclosing their required telemetry data for years and people still thing it’s an invasion of their privacy.

                Take you for example - I gave you a source, you checked 1/3rd of the information in it and started complaining.

                Why am I assuming you didn’t bother to read the whole thing? Because you’re claiming that “technical data” is too obscure of a term to figure out what it is. “Interaction Data”, in your words, “can be literally a keylogger”, right? Well, it’s very clearly defined in the table:

                Click counts, impression data, attribution data, how many searches performed, time on page, ad and sponsored tile clicks.

                Which of these would you consider to be “literally a keylogger”, hmm?

                • ell1e@leminal.spaceOPEnglish
                  1·
                  13 hours ago

                  Point taken and I appreciate the correction, but it still seems to include e.g. all URLs which could leak all your search queries and other rather invasive conclusions. If anything, this makes me feel like it confirms Mozilla does sell data it shouldn’t.

                  • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
                    1·
                    4 hours ago

                    but it still seems to include e.g. all URLs which could leak all your search queries

                    Which one? Interaction data? It literally cannot, or it would’ve been stated there.

                    If anything, this makes me feel like it confirms Mozilla does sell data it shouldn’t.

                    Yes, I know. That’s because you don’t really understand what you’re reading here.

                    These are not just “pinky promise” lists. These are legally binding lists of data types being shared and the data sub-processors. If you find anything incorrect there, you basically get free money in a lawsuit.