A FOSS chrome extension that attempts to remove the annoyance of cookie pop ups and banners.
There are some extensions out there that auto-accept cookies, but I didn't find one that auto rejected cookies without either chaining some extensions together or setting up custom rules in tools like uBlock origin. So with this extension, you just need to add it for non-essential cookies to be rejected.
Github: https://github.com/mitch292/reject-cookies Extension Link: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/bnbodofigkfjljnopfg...
It's still very early days for the extension. I want it to keep improving and working on more and more sites. Feedback welcome. Thanks!
As it is the content scripts manifest permission for https://*/* for content.js is always so jarring to see. For those that don’t know this allows the extension to run that script on every site you visit after clicking accept ONCE when you install the extension. That means it can see financial info, health info, legal info, your diary, etc…
Now this makes sense from a usability perspective (I never have to see a cookie banner ever again!), but the author could change content.js at any time and the extension would continue to run without prompting the user.
This is not an attack on you Mitch! It sure looks like you’re trying to provide value in this world rather than take it. Rather it’s an attack on Google’s extension security model I’m really shocked google has not taken a more careful and nuanced stance to protecting users from a security standpoint.
I write this as a fellow chrome extensions dev. I wish I had better more granular permissions structures to protect my users and give them more information about what I am requesting and why along with regular reminders so they can make informed decisions about what they want to share.
The broad permissions were required from a usability standpoint. Granting permission on every site for this extension would just be a 1 to 1 replacement of clicking reject on the banner or pop up for every site.
I would hope that before Chrome approves an extension to be added to the store that they are auditing the content of package.
For something like this, it's tractable.
Deleted Comment
Anyone can buy out or compromise this developer and slide complete takeover of your online life into an extension update.
So it can be audited. The problem is: who audits and how to know a new version is audited.
Bonus pro-tip: Firefox for Android supports uBlock Origin, which means you can get rid of these godawful banners on mobile, too. Only iOS users are stuck having to put up with them.
It should be but it's not.
Protecting users is the browser's job:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/enhanced-tracking-prote...
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/introducing-total-cooki...
Doesn't mean people implement it correctly though
Deleted Comment
You can configure the "Cookie Autodelete" extension to behave in a similar way.
Worth it IMO but I really wish there was a better way to submit bug reports than creating an account on their site. Fuck that dark pattern
https://i.imgur.com/QnedRVZ.png
Also, how's that compare to Consent-O-Matic in terms of effectiveness,safety (i.e. that it doesn't mangle the wrong thing on the site) and performance?
> Also, how's that compare to Consent-O-Matic in terms of effectiveness,safety (i.e. that it doesn't mangle the wrong thing on the site) and performance?
Dunno. I've never had any problems with it. All it does is hide the cookie banner DOM elements.
It is a very rare for me to see a site that's broken by ublock origin.
Still works for me to this day, but this option might get axed come June 2025.
Annoying banners increase pressure on people to contact their representatives to overturn those laws, allowing the operators to abuse the data
Less to think about, and it basically puts the web into the state it was in before we all got bent out of shape about tracking, which was fine.
(Now that I type that... I should have made an extension ages a go that just does "identify cookie banner and click on the left-most button automatically").
Why do you think the left-most button is always accept all?
Why do you think the accept all button will be in the same position on all reloads of the same site?
On Firefox we still have webRequestBlocking, so it is quite simple to block cookies. See for example https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ximatrix/
There's zero weaseling going on. No dark patterns. I'm just too busy to build a no-cookie version that passes info in the URL or w/e (which also seems less than ideal). Your two options are to use the site or don't use the site. If there was enough pressure from real customers to provide another option then I probably would, but it wouldn't change anything. It's just busy work / checking boxes.
IMO this needs to be built into the browsers rather than being yet another tax on builders due to spammers / scammers / advertisers. If we had meta referencing each cookie where you can disclaim exactly how it will be used and whether it's optional / required, then we would have a standard without dark patterns being possible.
Sorry, you want me to give browser privileges to code written by AI?
I had a Chrome extension with about 20,000 users and I received unsolicited buyout offers a few times a year, and some offers were very hard to refuse - but it's not hard to imagine anyone else capitulating.
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment
Dead Comment
For example the Linux kernel has mirrors where it's source code can be downloaded from.
AI cannot even "mirror" the Linux kernel. Try it! Ask it to deliver a monolithic kernel that works on a bunch of architectures and has drivers for a bunch of hardware. It will yield nothing close to the Linux kernel.
The one you link to doesn't really make sense:
> Data is collected on specific sites that the product is not working on. This data is sent explicitly by users and when it is collected we do not collect any information that could be tied to a specific user. Only the name of the site is collected and any additional information you include in the text of the report.
The original one that was deleted from the Github repo [0] is much simpler and to the point.
[0] https://github.com/mitch292/reject-cookies/commit/18a87b2bee...
I suppose that technically you could also just remove the pop-ups, that means that you never agreed to anything and the site have no permission to place cookies on your computer.