How we’re moving forward to make ads and privacy coexist

[Jon]

Let’s talk about advertising—more specifically, how Mozilla should participate in it while staying true to our core values.  

Earlier today, Mozilla President Mark Surman published a blog post on the topic. And Mozilla CEO Laura Chambers also shared her thoughts. 

We want to hear your thoughts too. 

We are committed to doing a better job engaging with our community and keeping you informed of the work we’re doing and why we believe in it. Mozilla wouldn’t be where we are today without the support of our community members, and we want to continue working together to build a better internet for all. That’s what we hope to use this space for.  

To kick off the discussion, here are a few important points from the blog posts:

• Advertising on Mozilla products, including Firefox will remain focused on respecting user privacy. That’s table stakes for us. 
• By deploying and iterating on new technologies, we aim to improve our standardization efforts and prove that advertising can support online ecosystems without eroding individual privacy. 
• Our focus is on technologies and methods like differential privacy, encryption, aggregation, and multiparty computation, which allow advertisers and publishers to derive insights about advertising performance without sharing user data with each other.

Please check out the above blog posts and share your feedback here. Or if you have any questions, let us know. We’ll be actively monitoring the discussion and plan to share our takeaways in a follow-up post.

[Lutz]

In her blog post Laura says about PPA:

While the trial was never activated for external users …

What does „external user“ mean? The feature is enabled by default in Firefox and much has been written by Mozilla about this being intentional. I am confused.

[brixter]

I'd like the ability to block ads by media type. I'm fine with text, picture ads or even gifs but video ads or live streaming videos are annoying. Since this can't be done, I just block all ads even those that I can tolerate.

[IsaG]

I don't want a single part of my peripheral vision occupied by someone trying to sell me something.

I do not tolerate any advertisements.

[Lutz]

As do I. Even a non-tracking ad is ugly, distracting and obscures my view of the content I am interested in. So I block them all as much as possible.

[wutongtaiwan]

I can't accept any ads. I hope that Mozilla will do everything in its power to fight advertisers, and I hope that the adguard ad filter will be built-in, which will protect the privacy of users to a great extent

[Frisky]

Users don't want this. Strange how in this post, it is recognized that Mozilla wouldn't exist without the support of its community, yet in Laura Chamber's post, it is made clear twice that Mozilla "acknowledges" that the majority of their users don't want this. Which is a understatement.

A company based on privacy should not be leaning into advertising.

[GeneralNapkin]

Considering the reason most use Firefox, this is really blowing your entire leg off.

Ads and privacy, even with 'privacy respecting controls' do not go hand-in-hand. Any ad, even tiny, if visible, is unacceptable, when all you want is information (the whole purpose of the Internet).

[gabeweb]

Maybe:

• Optional (users decide if wants to see ads or not)
• Non-intrusive
• Random (not related to content, user history and other "personal" data)
• Auditable
• Fairly policy (advertisers and products must be real)
• Minimal design but identifiable as an ad

I remember the early days of Opera Browser (when you had to pay for a web browser) and the free version had those HORRIBLE banner ads in the user interface. OMG. Same with Eudora Mail.

[Eriskyn]

If people wanted ads in their browser they would go back to Chrome. 

[greatwoohoo]

Funny way to put it but I completely agree with this. The one and only reason I am using Firefox and for so long is only Firefox can completely block ads and trackers. Even if some websites don't render correctly and some completely freezes I refuse to give up on Firefox because it has always respected my privacy and choice to not see any adverts. Looks like the management has decided to change all that.

So good luck to Mozilla and Firefox team.

[VideoAcct19]

Not on mobile. They still are yet to get their act together for iPhone. We can’t extensions on mobile or ad blockers. I use Firefox as my primary browser on Macbook but this has me unable to on mobile.

Listen to your users Mozilla or you’ll lose us  

[Chris-Winters]

To be fair their hands are tied on iPhone because Apple won't allow extensions for browsers on iOS. Apple wants all content blockers to be separate apps installable from the App Store. Firefox on Android however does have extension support and a few ad blockers are available straight from within Firefox itself.

[DonutRush]

Mozilla has been in the business of burning user goodwill for the past several years. Why should we trust you at all? What reason do we have to believe that any of this behaves the way you say it does?

You also have single digit market share, so there's zero reason for advertisers to behave either. It is already an industry based on dirtbag behavior, what reason would they have to respond to Firefox asking nicely?

We do not trust you. You buy ad companies, install complex tracking experiments without our consent, chase idiotic industry trends with no regard for whether they actually improve Firefox or the web.

The only thing Mozilla can actually do here is build harder into adblocking. Otherwise there is no reason to believe you are being honest or trustworthy, based on the past several years of your behavior. You also just use this very forum for us to vent, and then ignore us anyway.

You don't have a single leg to stand on.

[dumpsterFire]

My use of mozilla products will be restricted to forks of firefox. You can try to show me ads, but I doubt my use will generate any revenue that you will need in order to fuel innovation.

Mozilla should find another way to monetize outside of advertising. The advertising industry is a bubble: most of the money generated from it comes from collecting data for targeted ads and clients that are willing to over pay. Given how invasive and predatory advertising has become, its users moral imperative to block all possible forms of advertising.

[Sopel]

where did you get this idea that they will start showing you ads?

[dumpsterFire]

mozilla is creating an incentive structure to show users ads... this is a very bad thing for the long term, even if they implement this plan like they say they are going to

[Sopel]

wtf are these comments? are people unable to read these days?

this is a good direction and hope you continue it

[Eriskyn]

Found the Mozilla employee

[gabeweb]

Well, not all of us are able to pay one more subscription, much less from a third world country.

The idea is not crazy, as long as the ads are OPTIONAL, not obligatory.

[Eriskyn]

Then don't pay for subs and continue to block all ads. Don't know why location matters on this.

[gabeweb]

---

@Eriskyn wrote:

Then don't pay for subs [...]

---

That's the point, I don't want to see a "Firefox Premium" with a subscription model, SAAS.

Mozilla is looking for a way to be “non-impactful,” but there is a thin red line between privacy and sustainability.

[Eriskyn]

If Mozilla wanted to do a sub based model, they will do it in addition to ads. The decision to block ads will not affect their decision to do subscriptions.

[lackey]

NO.

[2mustange]

You are making this move? This move when Google is killing ad blockers and will just bring in a larger market share to Firefox over time. This just doesn't make sense at this time. I'm sorry but Mark and Laura are out of touch here on where the community wants to see the direction of Mozilla. Sure you have to run a business but you are running the changes at the expense of losing your community.

---

This pragmatic solution inspires us to envision a world in which digital ads can be both effective and privacy-preserving. It’s not impossible.

I envision a world where I am not bombarded by digital ads at all. And if i see an ad then it contains non of my data.

---

However, I can imagine a world where advertising online happens in a way that respects all of us, and where commercial and public interests are in balance.

---

This comment just reads "Private Equity Firm" all over it. Which makes me believe there is something nefarious behind the scenes 

[Sopel]

> And if i see an ad then it contains non of my data.

Your comment is ironic, given that this is exactly what this move is trying to achieve

[baser-acts0i]

There is no such thing as anonymous data. The digital data brokers have been in this arms race for 30 years now. You really think they won't be able to pinpoint you just because of an obfuscation layer? - For example, look into how page loaded fonts can be used for cross site tracking.

[lackey]

An ad in Firefox with PPA enabled can collect as much telemetry data from you as one from before PPA shipped in the browser. Mozilla isn't reducing anything here. 

Reduction is left up to the ad companies (if they are feeling uncharacteristically ethical, for some reason) or the user (by installing an ad blocker).

The only thing you can do to reduce data collection with the PPA check box is to turn it off.

[AdvertsSHALLdie]

Going forward with this implementation is antithetical in every way, shape and form to what a privacy respecting web browser should be.

I will not tolerate ads in ANY form. I use the web for information. Not to be sold something or have my usage data sold to third-parties without my consent. PERIOD.

I'm sorry Jon. There is no squaring the circle of privacy preserving advertising.
UBO is the only feature that is keeping me from seeking alternatives to Firefox. Once that goes, myself and hordes of your community will go with it.

From here on out I will be donating money to help further develop Ladybird Browser.
Your two faced actions are proof of how important alternatives are.

[Ichikawa]

If i get ads, at all, I am not being respected as a user. I will leave this browser. Completely tone deaf.

[Steeltent]

Do what you think is right as long as I can opt out of it and as long as ad blocking is still supported.

[Pikebot]

This sucks, man. Mozilla is not the first organization to try and make an anonymized ad tracking system, and every single time it’s been deanonynimized almost immediately. There’s no reason to think that this will be any different.

Advertisers are the enemy of privacy. If you get into bed with them, it really doesn’t matter what your intentions are, the result WILL be less secure and private. Mozilla should be treating them as an enemy, not trying to make friends. 

[wutongtaiwan]

I can tell you very clearly that Mozilla's privacy-preserving attribution will lead to a decrease in the number of Firefox users, and if FIrefox has a built-in adguard ad filtering extension, the number of Firefox users will increase.

[ohno]

Just out curiosity?  How do you think a technically oriented community that prizes its privacy is going to feel about being lied to and/or considered stupid by your executive/advertising team?  I can tell you... it's not going to go well for you.

[VideoAcct19]

A subscription model will sink Mozilla. This is a day and age that people are looking to save money, not need to spend more. I already paid for lifetime subscription to AdGuard which you are yet to allow us to integrate to Firefox on iPhone. Having paid for that, why in the hell should I pay for a subscription (repeated cost) to Mozilla?! I’ll go back to using Safari as my primary browser overall and only keep Firefox for building websites. 

You seriously need to rethink this… 

[wutongtaiwan]

If you want to increase the number of Firefox users, you need to improve your privacy protections, such as the built-in adguard filtering plugin, browser fingerprint randomization, built-in Tor network DPI protection, etc., you can focus on this aspect. Stop clinging to advertising

[Erwan62]

My point of view:
 
There is no such thing as good publicity!
 
I am even in favor of banning advertising, it would destroy the capitalist-liberal system in 2 seconds.
 
More seriously, I feel betrayed by a good number of decisions and directions taken by Mozilla in recent times and I feel that I am gradually losing the faith that I had for you.
 
Afterwards, I want to qualify, if it remains optional and a voluntary action on the part of the users, I can be satisfied with it. The problem is that you are doing this dishonestly:
 
- This function is activated by default without the user, who is not paying attention, being aware and consenting.
- It is impossible to request deletion after the fact.
- Users are not notified if they do not frequent your blogs.
 
Solution :
 
When Firefox is launched, a window should open and asks very explicitly what the user wants to activate in Firefox, this would concern: sponsors, tracking functionalities (whether anonymized or not) and all the little junk that we are added gradually (like the shopping experience!!).
 
Ps: Given the way things are going and the diminishing confidence I have in the foundation, please know that I am stopping sharing my telemetry data with you.

--FR------------------------------------------

Mon point de vue :

Il n'y a pas de bonne publicité !

Je suis même partisan de l'interdiction de la publicité, ça détruirait le système Capitaliste-libérale en 2 secondes.

Plus sérieusement, je me sens trahis par un bon nombre de décisions et d'orientation prises par Mozilla ces derniers temps et je sens bien que je perds progressivement le foie que j'avais pour vous.

Après, je veux bien nuancer, si cela reste facultatif et une action volontaire de la part des utilisateurs, je peux m'en satisfaire. Le problème, c'est que vous faites cela de façon malhonnête :

- Cette fonction est activée par défaut sans que l'utilisateur, qui ne ferait pas attention, soit au courant et consentant.

- Il est impossible de demander la suppression après coup.

- Les utilisateurs ne sont pas prévenus s'il ne fréquente par vos blogs.

Solution :

Au lancement de Firefox, une fenêtre devrait s'ouvrir et demande très explicitement ce que l'utilisateur veut activer dans Firefox, cela concernerait : les sponsors, les fonctionnalités de suivies (qu'elles soit anonymisé ou pas) et toutes les petites cochonneries qu'on nous ajoute progressivement (comme le shopping expérience !!).

Ps : Au vu des tournures que prennent les choses et de la diminution de confiance que j'ai envers la fondation, sachez que j'arrête de partager avec vous mes données télémétriques.

[cpearson]

Hey Jon, I appreciate that you folks are soliciting feedback from the community.

Privacy is an important subject for many Firefox users and it's not typically used in the same sentence as advertising so it's understandable that there's quite a bit of concern. I think it's important first of all to communicate Mozilla's vision and roadmap here clearly and transparently with the community. Mark's post is a great step here.

The more difficult part may be to clarify how Mozilla is balancing its mission with its bottom line. PPA looks like it could be great improvement on the current web advertising situation where users have to choose between blocking ads and depriving creators of revenue or exposing themselves to malware and invasive tracking. But is Mozilla pushing PPA because a world with PPA as the default is a more private world, or because a world with PPA as the default brings more revenue to Mozilla through Anonym.

It is certainly possible to earn money while improving the web, but it invites the concern that someday those goals may come into conflict. In that case, which would win? Mozilla's ideals of privacy or Mozilla's revenue? It may not be possible to fully assuage concerns here, but some more transparency around the business side may help. In this day and age having a non-profit owner does not engender any trust. People are justifiably skeptical of any corporation and trust has to be earned.

In my opinion, PPA would be a good step forward. But I worry Mozilla might be doing the right thing for the wrong reasons. I hope to be proven wrong.

[Chris-Winters]

I think what's missing from this discussion is a proper respect for the users' intelligence and agency. We are not mindless drones. We don't need to be constantly reminded that there is an economy, and that people who run companies want us to buy the things their companies produce. I don't need to be constantly inundated with reminders that Ford is selling a new F-150 this year that is 12% flashier than the one from last year or that Starbucks is still selling overpriced coffee. And let's be honest, this isn't what advertising is really used for most of the time anyways. Most of time it's used to display fake virus pop ups and scam old people out of their life savings or trick kids into downloading a malicious app on their smart device believing they'll really get to play GTA 6 on their Kindle Fire tablet.

As with my money, my time and attention is mine and I will decide, of my own free will, where, when and with whom I will spend it. I do not owe advertisers anything. Their deals aren't with me. I never agreed to anything. And Mozilla needs to tread very carefully here because Laura's own blog post states, twice, that they know most of us do not want this in any form and yet, like a rapist who refuses to take no for an answer, they are forcing it on us anyways. That is not hyperbole either. We are being told that it doesn't matter one bit how negatively we are impacted by advertising, how malvertising spreads malware or enables mass fraud and scams the innocent out of their life savings every single day, all that matters to advertisers and data brokers is that they get their piece of the pie. The money fundamentally changed Google for the worse, it can and will happen to Mozilla. Nobody is incorruptible.

[Russ123]

Deeply dissapointed you enabled the privacy changes with no communication to end users.  I only just found out about his, checked my settings and there it was.. I felt you were the last bastion in a market of hostile browsers.  You should have asked. It's not your computer...