Continuing the discussion from Abolish irrelevant to privacy requirements : [image] Abolish irrelevant to privacy requirements Firefox would need to be delisted since it does not meet the Must block third-party cookies by default requirement. Even arkenfox hardening would not make it meet this re…

We can still give this some time if anyone has last minute objections, but in the meantime I’ll mark this as approved for a PR to be created because I can’t imagine any reason we’d not want to make this change. [image] any1: but this is also broken in Firefox when a site is added to the excepti…

I vote for changing the criteria to “prevents cookies from accessing data unrelated to their site.” Analytical data has valid uses and shouldn’t be seen as evil, especially if you’re intentionally visiting a site. I also prefer this option as it leaves the criteria open ended in case any new methods…

IMO, blocking all third-party cookies shouldn’t be mandatory when partitioning works, but this is also broken in Firefox when a site is added to the exceptions. :smiling_face_with_tear: [image] Mention how per-site exceptions affect Firefox's Total Cookie Protection toolboxS…

Something to be aware of, is that some browsers use heuristics to make exceptions for state partitioning, which can allow unpartitioned access. This is also the case for Firefox in its default state. See State Partitioning - Privacy on the web | MDN

[image] Shampoo: Analytical data has valid uses and shouldn’t be seen as evil I don’t think partitioning third-party cookies affects this use-case in the first place, and blocking third-party cookies would only have minimal impact on analytics (maybe they can’t determine whether the same visi…

Curiously, Mullvad Browser differs from Mozilla’s privacy.restrict3rdpartystorage.heuristic defaults here, maybe because they are on 140 ESR. @ruihildt I wonder if you or Tor have considered not using ESR releases in Mullvad Browser, with the benefit for Tor Browser being that MB could serve as a p…

[image] jonah: FPI FPI is no longer maintained outside of Tor Browser. [image] jonah: I wonder if you or Tor have considered not using ESR releases in Mullvad Browser, with the benefit for Tor Browser being that MB could serve as a place to validate new features before the next TB releas…

[image] any1: FPI is no longer maintained outside of Tor Browser. Well not literal FPI that only affected known trackers, but I mean you’re essentially disabling all the features that make dFPI dynamic if you disable webcompat. [image] any1: There have been Tor/Mullvad alpha releases bas…

Privacy Guides Community

Desktop browser tracking cookies criteria question

Site Development

any1 March 12, 2026, 10:07pm 3

IMO, blocking all third-party cookies shouldn’t be mandatory when partitioning works, but this is also broken in Firefox when a site is added to the exceptions.

3 Likes

Topic		Replies	Views
Mention how per-site exceptions affect Firefox's Total Cookie Protection Site Development approved	15	861	March 13, 2026
Does "Total Cookie Protection" is important even I clean cookies? Questions browsers	3	420	July 10, 2024
Brave vulnerable to evercookie tracking General	10	599	May 3, 2025
Abolish irrelevant to privacy requirements Site Development	14	571	March 12, 2026
Can't understand Browser cookies protections Questions	1	191	August 2, 2025

Privacy Guides

Massive organizations are monitoring your online activities. Privacy Guides is your central privacy and security resource to protect yourself online.

Privacy Guides is a non-profit, socially motivated website that provides information for protecting your data security and privacy.

We do not make money from recommending certain products, and we do not use affiliate links.

Knowledge Base

Private Web Browsers

Top VPN Providers

Privacy-Respecting Services

Software Recommendations

More Resources

Desktop browser tracking cookies criteria question

Related topics