'I Don't Care About Cookies' extension sold to Avast

The lone developer of anti-cookie-warning browser add-on "I Don't Care About Cookies" has sold it to Avast, resulting in both concern – and new forks. Web users the world over have been suffering under the well-intentioned but ill-advised EU cookie law for a decade now. As a result, websites pester with warnings to get us to …

[Greybearded old scrote]

Or

I use Consent-O-Matic, because I do care. It's not dealing with all of them yet, but it says a clear 'No' to many.

I disagree that cookies are harmless, and remember that it's not just about cookies. It's about all tracking technology.

[heyrick]

Re: Or

The cookies themselves are fairly innocuous. It's what they can be used for that is the privacy nightmare. And thanks to the damned "legitimate interest" (no, advertiser, you have NO such thing), you're pretty much still being tracked regardless.

[Rich 2]

Re: Or

uMatrix plug-in gives you fine grained control of which domains’ cookies (and other crap) to block

[anothercynic]

Re: Or

Yes, I switched to Consent-o-Matic after this IDCAC-being-sold-to-Avast news became known (not via El Reg).

I think CoM looks a lot more appropriate :-)

[Mostly Irrelevant]

Re: Or

Where are you finding cookie notices with a "no" button? They almost always just have "accept" buttons and the checkbox for required cookies forced on.

[Greybearded old scrote]

Re: Or

More recent ones have a 'Reject All' button, since they've finally got the message that the law requires rejection to be no more effort than acceptance. (El Reg hasn't, hint hint.)

Otherwise COM fills in the form, flipping all the switches to 'Reject.'

The sites that say 'Accept or sod off,' well there's no technical fix for them.

Like others here, I also have FF configured to drop all cookies at the end of a session, but I want my 'Hell No!' to appear in the site logs.

[b0llchit]

Be wary of stored and transmitted data

Browser cookies are fairly harmless things...

That is quite an ignorant statement. The cookie text may be harmless, but you must see and analyse it in the proper context instead of making a statement of triviality.

You probably missed the part where cookies are used to track people for the benefit of corps making more money and for governments to trace dissent? You probably also missed the part where cookies are being stolen to hijack sessions and steal stuff?

You should be wary, every time when information flows, be wary.

[Greybearded old scrote]

Hmm

If the "I Don't Care" users truly don't, why are they worried about the privacy implications of this sale?

[MiguelC]

Re: Hmm

If you use it along Cookie AutoDelete, then accepting them has no real consequence, as they last only while the page is open (other durations available)

[Nipsirc]

Good in combination with another extension

IDCAC works really well when you combine it with Cookie AutoDelete. IDCAC accepts all the cookies, then at the end of your visit to the website, Cookie AutoDelete removes them again.

[anothercynic]

Re: Good in combination with another extension

Yes, very true that. Cookie Autodelete is a great little extension too!

[ChoHag]

Re: Good in combination with another extension

I find it easier to wait for firefox to crash. It can be depended upon and you only need to configure it to remove cookies etc. when it starts.

[ComputerSays_noAbsolutelyNo]

What a fitting name - Norton LifeLock

Talking about vendor lock-in ...

I have the theory that a lot of psycho-active substances went bad due to the travel restrictions that were put in place due to the novel virus with royal head gear. That's may explanation for exceptionally dumb marketing and other creative output encountered these days.

But I might also be wrong ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Naming names

Going up the chain, we have Avast, Norton LifeLock, Symantic, and Broadcom. All are companies I trust about as much as Faecesbook.

It doesn't affect me because I use Firefox which allows me to block trackers, cookies, and popups (with persistent exceptions for cookies and popups, where needed). It also allows me to delete all cookies automatically when it's closed.

[sansva]

Already uninstalled IDCAC from all my browsers on all systems. The only reason or Avast to take over the project is to push nagware or hook people on more products.

[Mr. V. Meldrew]

Such a shame.

A strange name "I Don't care about cookies" for a nifty little extension that by name implies that by installation you actually DO care about those pesky cookies, whoever named them "cookies" should also apologies unreservedly to the baked snack manufacturers and consumers for any confusion between a sweet oat/wheat based delight and a nagging and frankly intrusive bit of shitware that IDCAC deftly dealt with.

The lone ranger who invented this extension has made my browsing so more pleasurable (combined with AD Block Plus). Both of whom have received the odd donation over the years.

As for flogging IDCAC to Avast well good on him and I hope he made a life changing sum of money. Others will fill his boots in good time if Avast start any nagware trickery.

[Dave Pickles]

Result...

Installed the first fork mentioned in the article and now the cookie bar on the El Reg site, which has remained unclicked for the last couple of years, is gone.

[midgepad]

Annoyingly Reach sites "countyonline" continue to ask.

Ah well, next version or extension.

[DoctorPaul]

Same is happening to Nova Launcher

Saw this story elsewhere a few days ago.

There was mention in the comments that the popular Android Nova Launcher has gone a similar way, bought out by someone that I wouldn't want near my data.

Apparently the rot may set in with v8 so I've stopped auto update on it and downloaded the apk files for v7 from the developer web site while they're still there.

[On yer bike]

NortonLifeLock - and hence Avast - is the part of Symantec NOT bought by Broadcom. It trades separately under stock ticker NLOK.

[Liam Proven]

Thanks for the correction. We've amended the article.

[Robert Carnegie]

Disagree

I'm reasonably sure that a web site is entitled to store and to receive back a cookie in your web browser that says "This user doesn't want to hold informative cookies", which sounds like a paradox but isn't really. Of course a cookie also has a natural expiry - unless renewed - and so I see The Register's cookie banner coming back after, let's see, is it a month? And likewise certain comics sites that I use.

I think either the Opera or the Vivaldi web browser added a "feature", optional I hope, apparently to accept all of the cookies that a web site wanted to put on your computer, without telling you, despite the web sites trying to tell you. No. Thank. You.

Tracking a user with cookies obviously lets you determine the user's race, politics, religion, sex, sexuality, and views on labor organization and on women, but it isn't really any of your business to know that about me. However, the current British government disagrees.

[00prometheus]

The idea that websites can't remember that you asked to not be tracked is rubbish. If you read the options even once you will see that they always have an option for Functional Cookies that can't be unselected. The fact that they ask you each time is on purpose; they are trying to make you give up your EU-lawgiven right to not be tracked.

[897241021271418289475167044396734464892349863592355648549963125148587659264921474689457046465304467]

I disable JS when I see a cookie consent whatsit, and if that doesn't workI disable CSS too... then I delete all cookies when I leave a site. Simples.