LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-29-2011, 02:17 PM   #1
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Rep: Reputation: 99
I need a working cookie manager for mozilla sea monkey


watching web pages load there is way way too much time being spent sending data back and forth to sites like doubleclick.com adpluse.com and other profiling web sites
it's my band width my time being wasted none of there damn business where I go on the web and what I look at I want this damn tracking to STOP
but at the same time I want to keep my forum passwords
the cookie manager is not removing these damned things
is there a better cookie manager that works and runs on linux ?
 
Old 11-29-2011, 03:30 PM   #2
John VV
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 12,665

Rep: Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683
the cookie manager IS BUILT IN TO FF AND SEAMONKEY
please install the current firefox 8 or seamonkey 2.5
and it works just fine , if you use it.
 
Old 11-29-2011, 04:48 PM   #3
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 99
try using it sometime
it may work for removing a few cookies
but when I look at my cookie files they add up to about 3mega bytes
I need to press the the page down key 30 times to scroll through the list
I need one that will let me select the cookies I want to keep and delete the rest
it tacks about 2 minutes to remove each cookie and remove permission for the web site to replace the cookie

the built in cookie manager is a bad practical joke
I'm looking at at least 150 hours to clean them out

Last edited by rob.rice; 11-29-2011 at 05:12 PM.
 
Old 11-30-2011, 06:17 PM   #4
macinix
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2011
Distribution: CentOS 5, Mac OS 10 (Darwin/FreeBSD), Debian, Microsoft Linux
Posts: 14

Rep: Reputation: 0
What about supercookies? (UPDATE: CookieFast does not work as expected)!

Hi There rice,
for supercookies (a.k.a. flash cookies), my favorite is the simple yet controllable "BetterPrivacy" . It's quite brilliant. However you'll have to deal with the automatic disabling of addons that haven't officially registered as "compatible" if you upgrade to SeaMonkey 2.5! There is a workaround I believe, but I'm not upgrading from 2.0.12 b/c I like the stability of this release the most.

For regular cookies, I remember I used one, I think it had a circle-target, that would flash at the bottom of the page window. But I can't find it in the extensions browser anymore... don't know why... It was quite good, allowing fine-grain control over individual websites being allowed to drop cookies, etc. "CookieSafe" is what keeps coming up near the top of my searches...
Also, relatively new on the scene "CookieFast"
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/sea...on/cookiefast/*
or you can go to:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon
and try those out that don't "officially" support seamonkey, however, most of the ones I've ever tried work in my experience.

Hope there is something in here you can use.
+)



*Note: Please note, CookieFast does not work on my (an older) version of SeaMonkey (2.0.12) on the Mac platform.

Last edited by macinix; 12-02-2011 at 10:12 PM. Reason: Addon behavior unexpected.
 
Old 11-30-2011, 07:25 PM   #5
John VV
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 12,665

Rep: Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683
flash cookies are a different story
i take care of them with
Code:
rm "/home/( your user name here)/.macromedia/Flash_Player/#SharedObjects" 
ln -s /dev/null "/home/( your user name here)/.macromedia/Flash_Player/#SharedObjects"
 
Old 12-02-2011, 11:40 AM   #6
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinix View Post
Hi There rice,
for supercookies (a.k.a. flash cookies), my favorite is the simple yet controllable "BetterPrivacy" . It's quite brilliant. However you'll have to deal with the automatic disabling of addons that haven't officially registered as "compatible" if you upgrade to SeaMonkey 2.5! There is a workaround I believe, but I'm not upgrading from 2.0.12 b/c I like the stability of this release the most.

For regular cookies, I remember I used one, I think it had a circle-target, that would flash at the bottom of the page window. But I can't find it in the extensions browser anymore... don't know why... It was quite good, allowing fine-grain control over individual websites being allowed to drop cookies, etc. "CookieSafe" is what keeps coming up near the top of my searches...
Also, relatively new on the scene "CookieFast"
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/sea...on/cookiefast/
or you can go to:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon
and try those out that don't "officially" support seamonkey, however, most of the ones I've ever tried work in my experience.

Hope there is something in here you can use.
+)
I went ahead and down graded to 2.5 and I'm sorry I did there is a huge bug in it that makes the mouse disaper on the right side of some web pages on other web pages it traps the mouse in a small inadvisable box the only way out is to hit ALT+left arrow
even worse is 95% of the add-ons are incompatible with it of the ones that are compatible with it 95% of them are useless for 95% of the users
this is one case where free soft ware is worth exactly what I paid for it
like KDE 4.0 the newer version is badly broken compared to the older version
this confirms my view that newer software IS NOT always better

Last edited by rob.rice; 12-02-2011 at 11:46 AM.
 
Old 12-02-2011, 09:36 PM   #7
sgosnell
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Baja Oklahoma
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 337

Rep: Reputation: 59
Seamonkey is not a Mozilla product, but that's beside the point. I don't use it, so I don't know what plugins/extensions work with it, but for Iceweasel/Firefox, Ghostery is an excellent extension for blocking trackers. It will block them, and they don't load, so pages load a little faster.
 
Old 12-02-2011, 09:40 PM   #8
macinix
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2011
Distribution: CentOS 5, Mac OS 10 (Darwin/FreeBSD), Debian, Microsoft Linux
Posts: 14

Rep: Reputation: 0
I tried to warn about upgrading to 2.5! I did not advise you to do so! Maybe you misread my post? Sorry! Also you say 'down graded' to 2.5, perhaps you're being cute seeing as it's an inferior product (at least I agree with you on this)? But we generally refer to 'downgrading' when we move, say from 2.5 (back) to 2.0.12.

I do apologize again if you misread my post and thought I advised upgrading.
 
Old 12-02-2011, 09:48 PM   #9
John VV
Guru
 
Registered: Aug 2005
Posts: 12,665

Rep: Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683Reputation: 1683
Quote:
Seamonkey is not a Mozilla product ...
What ???
i have been running mozilla ( now mozilla Seamonkey ) since 0.6 or 0.7 Beta
 
Old 12-02-2011, 09:58 PM   #10
macinix
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2011
Distribution: CentOS 5, Mac OS 10 (Darwin/FreeBSD), Debian, Microsoft Linux
Posts: 14

Rep: Reputation: 0
I think what he means is that it is principally the project of one man, not the organization "Mozilla" properly speaking. I have been using SeaMonkey for a very long time as well, (including now), but not quite that long...

Also, Ghostery is great! I just installed it and it's quite fun! Let's see how it works on relaunch... etc... I don't want to have to tag these trackers all the time (with the way my seamonkey is setup, though I don't believe I will).

Lastly, it would appear I have to * (that symbol represents a verb: asterisk) my previous pointing toward "CookieFast", as it apparently does NOT work with SeaMonkey 2.0.12 on a Mac.

Last edited by macinix; 12-02-2011 at 10:10 PM. Reason: Update recommendation.
 
Old 12-02-2011, 10:38 PM   #11
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgosnell View Post
Seamonkey is not a Mozilla product, but that's beside the point. I don't use it, so I don't know what plugins/extensions work with it, but for Iceweasel/Firefox, Ghostery is an excellent extension for blocking trackers. It will block them, and they don't load, so pages load a little faster.
have a look at http://www.mozilla.org/projects/
as a fact of the matter firefox is a fork off the mozilla web browser witch is now called seamonkey
the addon installer and the addon file format for firefox and seamonkey were not the same so the addons for one would not install on the other now the installer and addon file format have been synced so the addos work on both

I got on a developer's comment page and bitched about the 95-95-95 rule this afternoon and as of 10:30 it looks like that rule no longer apples

the ghostery addon cut page loading by about 20%
with no script installed now pages load in about half the time
I just installed add block haven't tried it yet so let's see how it dose

Last edited by rob.rice; 12-02-2011 at 11:07 PM.
 
Old 12-03-2011, 11:04 AM   #12
sgosnell
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Baja Oklahoma
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 337

Rep: Reputation: 59
I somehow got seamonkey and iceape confused in my mind. Sorry 'bout that. Trying to keep all the Mozilla and Debian names straight is a full-time job, and my mind only works part-time.

I've been running Ghostery, Noscript, and Adblock Plus for so long I can't really say which does what for improving page loading, but together they help a great deal.

I also like BetterPrivacy. It notifies you if an LSO has been added, and you have the option to remove it immediately, on browser close, or any other time, or keeping it. You can protect individual LSOs if you want, and that is sometimes very convenient, because some websites use them to make logging in easier. Banks use them to recognize your computer, so you don't have to answer multiple challenge questions every time you log in. If you prefer answering them, then you can simply delete the LSOs, your choice. You set the configurations to whatever you prefer.

Last edited by sgosnell; 12-03-2011 at 11:26 AM.
 
Old 12-03-2011, 03:52 PM   #13
rob.rice
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2004
Distribution: slack what ever
Posts: 784

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinix View Post
I tried to warn about upgrading to 2.5! I did not advise you to do so! Maybe you misread my post? Sorry! Also you say 'down graded' to 2.5, perhaps you're being cute seeing as it's an inferior product (at least I agree with you on this)? But we generally refer to 'downgrading' when we move, say from 2.5 (back) to 2.0.12.

I do apologize again if you misread my post and thought I advised upgrading.
I can trade my working 1994 car for a 2004 with a blown engine and a dropped transmission now may I ask you this ?
would that exchange be an upgrade ?
after all it is a 10year newer car .

in my book ANY TIME you have less functionally it's a downgrade !

I think I bitched to the right people in the right way about the apparent 95-95-95 rule now it's fixed .

Last edited by rob.rice; 12-03-2011 at 04:05 PM.
 
Old 12-04-2011, 06:52 PM   #14
macinix
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2011
Distribution: CentOS 5, Mac OS 10 (Darwin/FreeBSD), Debian, Microsoft Linux
Posts: 14

Rep: Reputation: 0
Indeed, using a word to convey the opposite of it's denoted meaning is workable and clever, however, in this context it escaped me. In fact I have used the same word, 'downgrade', in the same context and manner myself! and for the exact same reason you specify! Furthermore, to be sure, I applied it to versions of Seamonkey that FF4.0+ was (apparently, news to me) based on. My bad! I hope you had fun writing about cars, and I do hope you've never had a car like that...
+)
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Mozilla Sea Monkey review LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 11-30-2009 11:00 AM
sea monkey crash autophil Linux - Software 1 06-05-2009 11:09 AM
Is there a good reason to choose Sea Monkey over Firefox rhomp2002 Slackware 13 08-30-2007 12:29 PM
Sea Monkey Random Number Generator jschiwal General 2 02-23-2007 10:27 PM
firefox/sea monkey won't start on new install of slackware 11 suna22 Slackware 5 02-15-2007 08:54 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration