AVG has just told me it has found 77 tracking cookies.

Obviously, it's mostly just an attempt to sell me something, but
assuming there's a _grain_ of truth in the claim: how does it know which
ones are tracking ones? Is it just that they've built up a list of known
tracking cookies, or are such cookies recognisable in some way?

(Windows 7-32; Chrome last.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Everyone is entitled to an *informed* opinion." - Harlan Ellison

On 5/30/2023 3:17 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> AVG has just told me it has found 77 tracking cookies.
>
> Obviously, it's mostly just an attempt to sell me something, but assuming there's a _grain_ of truth in the claim: how does it know which ones are tracking ones? Is it just that they've built up a list of known tracking cookies, or are such cookies recognisable in some way?
>
> (Windows 7-32; Chrome last.)

I can give examples for Firefox-family browsers. Presumably Chrome
has the same concepts baked into theirs (they both have DOM storage).
What I find about Chrome, is it has even more databases in the design,
than Firefox does, and you have no idea what they're all for.

*******

DOM storage on browsers, allows storing a fair amount of detail.
In Agent Ransack, I do an MSDOS (non-regex) search on +++ to find these.
There is a lot more structure below the summary shown in this example.
Presumably every vid I've viewed, is stored down there.

C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\SeaMonkey\Profiles\abcd1234.default\storage\default\
https+++www.youtube.com\
.metadata
idb\
cache\

Whereas cookies are stored in cookies.sqlite .

Cookies can be as simple as a "serial number for the user". Every time
you visit Youtube, the cookie would be fetched, Google would say "oh, that's J.P. again".
Some cookies have a bit more fine structure (say, four lines of text with numbers).

Both mechanisms allow "tracking". Tracking is any activity where
"persistent storage" records what was done during the session.

If nothing at all was written to the disk drive, then we would not care so much.

That's why I just toss cookies.sqlite in the trash,
rather than spending hours "hand-editing" the damn thing.
Cookies.sqlite is regenerated so it just comes back
and can grow to a substantial size in only one day.

Cookies and DOM items go in the trash here, every day or two.

There are other files I *could* throw out, but if I did, there
would be side effects in future sessions. Chrome is easier to
break than Firefox. One of the sqlite databases in Firefox is
a "master" and an identifying number there (a record number) is
used in the other databases so the relational aspects will work.
If "Google.com" is 123, then the master database records that,
and other databases use "123" instead of Google.com . if you
started chucking stuff (like, you threw away the master),
then some amount of cleanup and purging would be required
of the other databases, so stuff still made sense.

The whole point of wiring Chrome like a bomb-squad project,
is to keep people from tossing away the tracking materials :-)

I sure hope someone has a recipe for cleaning Chrome, because
I don't know of a recipe right off hand.

One other note, when you're doing forensics and trying to
find all the instances of "google.com" in a directory, be
aware that the loons store these spelled backwards "moc.elgoog".
When searching then, for that sort of evidence, you are required
to do two searches, one spelled "forwards", one spelled "backwards".
This is just a way of doubling the work for the humans (helpful).

And when a loon stores something in "jsonlz4" format ?
Just another anti-user feature. And another. And another.
What fun it must be, to be a developer.

Paul

In message <u55kt2$23bh9$1@dont-email.me> at Tue, 30 May 2023 16:04:49,
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
>On 5/30/2023 3:17 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>> AVG has just told me it has found 77 tracking cookies.
>> Obviously, it's mostly just an attempt to sell me something, but
>>assuming there's a _grain_ of truth in the claim: how does it know
>>which ones are tracking ones? Is it just that they've built up a list
>>of known tracking cookies, or are such cookies recognisable in some way?
>> (Windows 7-32; Chrome last.)
>
>I can give examples for Firefox-family browsers. Presumably Chrome
>has the same concepts baked into theirs (they both have DOM storage).
>What I find about Chrome, is it has even more databases in the design,
>than Firefox does, and you have no idea what they're all for.
>
>*******
>
>DOM storage on browsers, allows storing a fair amount of detail.
>In Agent Ransack, I do an MSDOS (non-regex) search on +++ to find these.
>There is a lot more structure below the summary shown in this example.
>Presumably every vid I've viewed, is stored down there.
>
>C:\Users\username\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\SeaMonkey\Profiles\abcd1234.de
>fault\storage\default\
> https+++www.youtube.com\
> .metadata
> idb\
> cache\
>
>Whereas cookies are stored in cookies.sqlite .
>
>Cookies can be as simple as a "serial number for the user". Every time
>you visit Youtube, the cookie would be fetched, Google would say "oh,
>that's J.P. again".

I don't mind that.

>Some cookies have a bit more fine structure (say, four lines of text
>with numbers).
>
>Both mechanisms allow "tracking". Tracking is any activity where
>"persistent storage" records what was done during the session.

Hmm. I suppose that is so. I was interpreting it as meaning one site can
tell which other sites I've been to. (I don't mind say YouTube
"tracking" what I do _on_ YouTube - in fact I wish it would a bit
better; I _don't_ want it to suggest videos I've seen before, and I'm
sure the "I'm not interested | Tell us why | I've already viewed this
video" five-click doesn't work very well, as I'm sure it has suggested
such videos again.)
>
>If nothing at all was written to the disk drive, then we would not care
>so much.
>
>That's why I just toss cookies.sqlite in the trash,
>rather than spending hours "hand-editing" the damn thing.
>Cookies.sqlite is regenerated so it just comes back
>and can grow to a substantial size in only one day.

Anyone know what the equivalent is for Chrome?
>
>Cookies and DOM items go in the trash here, every day or two.
>
>There are other files I *could* throw out, but if I did, there
>would be side effects in future sessions. Chrome is easier to

That's the problem, of course.

>break than Firefox. One of the sqlite databases in Firefox is
>a "master" and an identifying number there (a record number) is
>used in the other databases so the relational aspects will work.
>If "Google.com" is 123, then the master database records that,
>and other databases use "123" instead of Google.com . if you
>started chucking stuff (like, you threw away the master),
>then some amount of cleanup and purging would be required
>of the other databases, so stuff still made sense.
>
>The whole point of wiring Chrome like a bomb-squad project,
>is to keep people from tossing away the tracking materials :-)
>
>I sure hope someone has a recipe for cleaning Chrome, because
>I don't know of a recipe right off hand.
>
>One other note, when you're doing forensics and trying to
>find all the instances of "google.com" in a directory, be
>aware that the loons store these spelled backwards "moc.elgoog".
>When searching then, for that sort of evidence, you are required
>to do two searches, one spelled "forwards", one spelled "backwards".
>This is just a way of doubling the work for the humans (helpful).

But - assuming it actually does work - what would AVG do if I paid them
the (quite substantial) fees they're asking for? Do they have a secret
arrangement with all the browser manufacturers?
>
>And when a loon stores something in "jsonlz4" format ?
>Just another anti-user feature. And another. And another.
>What fun it must be, to be a developer.
>
> Paul
Indeed!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I don't like that word [atheist]; it implies that there's a god not to believe
in - Eric Idle, quoted in RT 2016/12/10-16

On 5/30/2023 9:44 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

> But - assuming it actually does work - what would AVG do if I paid them the (quite substantial) fees they're asking for? Do they have a secret arrangement with all the browser manufacturers?

Well, you could use ProcMon and watch what files a browser writes.
(No, don't do that.)

Chromium is the FOSS version of Chrome and what Chrome is based upon.
Being Free and Open Source, you can read that code. Although the last
time I wanted info on Chromium, it wasn't the easiest thing to get at.

Chrome is Chromium+GoogleCode to add a few more tracking features or whatever.

*******

Bleachbit package, has scripts to "clean various things". This includes "google_chrome.xml".
Running the package, is a hell of a lot easier than reading the code.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BleachBit

Using the Bash shell in Windows 11, I could install Bleachbit with Synaptic and have
access to a script for Chrome cleaning. Bleachbit is cross-platform, and works
on Windows and Linux, and of course, you'd use the actual package to do removal.

I like to look at the control file, for references to file structures,
and for their proposals of what they're going to do. For example, some
of the coding here, proposes to "vacuum" or defragment an sqlite, rather
than change the semantic content. The verb "sqlite.vacuum" here, on
Windows, would correspond to sqlite3.exe some.sqlite .vacuum , and you should
be exited from the browser (verified via Task Manager), before vacuuming anything.
Presumably Bleachbit (Win version) will have a menu, and "Clean Google Chrome"
would be just one item in the menu. You don't unleash the entire package
in any case.

I'm presenting this, to give some idea of the complexity of their
cleaning process. Not because I expect you to traverse this by hand.
As far as I know, Chrome uses +++ in the pathname for its DOM storage
to, but I don't see that here except as a reference to $$profile$$/Local Storage/http*localstorage
and I don't have a Chrome set up right now, so can't tell you
what's in there :-) I'm so slow at this, you've probably assumed
(correctly) that I've fallen asleep :-) It's an exciting topic, browser
cleaning.

/usr/share/bleachbit/cleaners/google_chrome.xml

<cleaner id="google_chrome">
<label>Google Chrome</label>
<description>Web browser</description>
<running type="exe" os="windows">chrome.exe</running>
<running type="exe" os="linux">chrome</running>
<var name="base">
<value os="windows">%LocalAppData%\Google\Chrome\User Data</value>
<value os="linux">$XDG_CONFIG_HOME/google-chrome</value>
</var>
<var name="profile">
<value os="windows">%LocalAppData%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default</value>
<value os="linux">$XDG_CONFIG_HOME/google-chrome/Default</value>
<value os="linux">$XDG_CONFIG_HOME/google-chrome-beta/Default</value>
</var>
<option id="cache">
<label>Cache</label>
<description>Delete the web cache, which reduces time to display revisited pages</description>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$base$$/Safe Browsing Channel IDs-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Network Persistent State"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$base$$/ShaderCache"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/File System"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Pepper Data/Shockwave Flash/CacheWritableAdobeRoot/"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Service Worker"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Storage/ext/*/*def/GPUCache"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$/GPUCache/"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="dns_prefetching/host_referral_list"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="dns_prefetching/startup_list"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="net/http_server_properties/servers"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$base$$/Local State" address="HostReferralList"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$base$$/Local State" address="StartupDNSPrefetchList"/>
<!-- Linux-specific -->
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$XDG_CACHE_HOME/google-chrome/"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$XDG_CACHE_HOME/google-chrome-beta/"/>
<!-- Windows-specific -->
<action command="delete" search="glob" path="$$base$$\B*.tmp"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$\Default\Application Cache\"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\Cache\"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\Media Cache\"/>
</option>
<option id="cookies">
<label>Cookies</label>
<description>Delete cookies, which contain information such as web site preferences, authentication, and tracking identification</description>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Cookies"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Cookies-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Extension Cookies"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Extension Cookies-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/IndexedDB/"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Pepper Data/Shockwave Flash/WritableRoot/"/>
</option>
<option id="dom">
<label>DOM Storage</label>
<description>Delete HTML5 cookies</description>
<!-- Examples for Google Chrome 7.0 on Fedora 13. Notice we avoid deleting extension (add-on) preferences.
~/.config/google-chrome/Default/Local Storage/chrome-extension_mmffncokckfccddfenhkhnllmlobdahm_0.localstorage
~/.config/google-chrome/Default/Local Storage/http_samy.pl_0.localstorage -->
<action command="chrome.databases_db" search="file" path="$$profile$$/databases/Databases.db"/>
<action command="delete" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/Local Storage/http*localstorage"/>
<action command="delete" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/Local Storage/http*localstorage-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/databases/http*/"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Local Storage/leveldb"/>
</option>
<option id="form_history">
<label>Form history</label>
<description>A history of forms entered in web sites</description>
<action command="chrome.autofill" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Web Data"/>
</option>
<option id="history">
<label>History</label>
<description>Delete the history which includes visited sites, downloads, and thumbnails</description>
<!-- keep /History before /Favicons -->
<action command="chrome.history" search="file" path="$$profile$$/History"/>
<action command="chrome.favicons" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Favicons"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$base$$/chrome_shutdown_ms.txt"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$base$$/Safe Browsing Cookies-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Archived History"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Archived History-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/DownloadMetadata"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/History-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/History Index ????-??"/>
<action command="delete" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/History Index ????-??-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/History Provider Cache"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Network Action Predictor"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Network Action Predictor-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Origin Bound Certs-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Shortcuts"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Shortcuts-journal"/>
<!-- Before about January 2016 Thumbnails was an SQLite file, by Google Chrome 48 it is a folder -->
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Thumbnails"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$/Thumbnails"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Thumbnails-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Top Sites"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Top Sites-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Visited Links"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/QuotaManager"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/QuotaManager-journal"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$/Session Storage/"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="profile/content_settings/exceptions"/>
<!-- Windows-specific -->
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\JumpListIconsMostVisited\"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\JumpListIconsOld\"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\JumpListIconsRecentClosed\"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$\JumpListIcons\"/>
</option>
<option id="search_engines">
<label>Search engines</label>
<description translators="'Factory' means a search engine that is installed by default 'from the factory,' but this is different than a 'default search engine' https://lists.launchpad.net/launchpad-translators/msg00283.html">Reset the search engine usage history and delete non-factory search engines, some of which are added automatically</description>
<action command="chrome.keywords" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Web Data"/>
</option>
<option id="session">
<label>Session</label>
<description>Delete the current and last sessions</description>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Current Session"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Current Tabs"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Last Session"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Last Tabs"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.all" path="$$profile$$/Extension State"/>
</option>
<option id="sync">
<label>Sync</label>
<description>Delete the sync data and sign out of the browser</description>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$/Sync Data/"/>
<action command="delete" search="walk.files" path="$$profile$$/Sync Data Backup/"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$base$$/Local State" address="profile"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="account_info"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="google_services"/>
<action command="json" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Preferences" address="sync"/>
</option>
<option id="passwords">
<label>Passwords</label>
<description>A database of usernames and passwords as well as a list of sites that should not store passwords</description>
<warning>This option will delete your saved passwords.</warning>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Login Data"/>
<action command="delete" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Login Data-journal"/>
</option>
<option id="vacuum">
<label>Vacuum</label>
<description>Clean database fragmentation to reduce space and improve speed without removing any data</description>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Cookies"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Extension Cookies"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/History"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/History Index ????-??"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Login Data"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Origin Bound Certs"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Network Action Predictor"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/previews_opt_out.db"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/QuotaManager"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Shortcuts"/>
<!-- Before about January 2016 Thumbnails was an SQLite file, by Google Chrome 48 it is a folder -->
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Thumbnails" type="f"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Top Sites"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Web Data"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/databases/Databases.db"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/databases/http*/?"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="glob" path="$$profile$$/databases/http*/??"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="$$profile$$/Sync Data/SyncData.sqlite3"/>
<!-- The three below were seen on Google Chrome on Windows before Chrome version 66 -->
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="%LocalAppData%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Archived History"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="%LocalAppData%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Plugin Data\Google Gears\localserver.db"/>
<action command="sqlite.vacuum" search="file" path="%LocalAppData%\Google\Chrome\User Data\Default\Plugin Data\Google Gears\permissions.db"/>
</option>
</cleaner>

"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote

| >Both mechanisms allow "tracking". Tracking is any activity where
| >"persistent storage" records what was done during the session.
| | Hmm. I suppose that is so. I was interpreting it as meaning one site can
| tell which other sites I've been to. (I don't mind say YouTube
| "tracking" what I do _on_ YouTube

If you visit a typical commercial webpage you'll find
links to Google Analytics, and other Google properties.
Maybe Facebook. Scorecardresearch. Etc. If they can't
set a cookie they'll typically give you a dummy image.
They may be sending you the page through a separate
CDN network. They may be using Akamai or Amazon to
handle the load...
It gets complicated. But yes, if you don't block those
tracking domains specifically then there are multiple
entities who know nearly every site you visit. If you
allow 3rd-party cookies it's more extensive tracking.

Interestingly, I ws at a site recently that wouldn't work
without 3rd-party cookies. I don't remember now what it
was. And they didn't tell me. I had to figure it out.

A couple
of days ago I got an email from my dentist. "Please confirm
your appt". The confirmation wouldn't work. According to
NoScript there were something like 9 domains trying to run
script! All they needed was to read the URL parameters and
show me a "Confirmed" landing page. I don't know if dentists
come under US HIPAA, but Google Analytics was one of the
entities trying to track me in my appt confirmation. There
were also numerous others. I'm guessing the company the
use, Nexhealth, has got a side gig going, selling dental
customer personal data to all those other pigs at the script
trough.

In message <u56qns$2b13k$1@dont-email.me> at Wed, 31 May 2023 02:50:35,
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
>On 5/30/2023 9:44 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>
>> But - assuming it actually does work - what would AVG do if I paid
>>them the (quite substantial) fees they're asking for? Do they have a
>>secret arrangement with all the browser manufacturers?
>
>Well, you could use ProcMon and watch what files a browser writes.
>(No, don't do that.)
>
>Chromium is the FOSS version of Chrome and what Chrome is based upon.
>Being Free and Open Source, you can read that code. Although the last

Decades ago, I could have - maybe. I suspect not now.

>time I wanted info on Chromium, it wasn't the easiest thing to get at.
>
>Chrome is Chromium+GoogleCode to add a few more tracking features or whatever.
>
>*******
>
>Bleachbit package, has scripts to "clean various things". This includes
>"google_chrome.xml".
>Running the package, is a hell of a lot easier than reading the code.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BleachBit
>
>Using the Bash shell in Windows 11, I could install Bleachbit with
>Synaptic and have

Again, I think that's beyond my capabilities now. I guess I'll continue,
letting all the evils control me. (Mention of "Bash shell" makes me see
where I'm limited. I last really played with UNIX - and it was UNIX then
- over 40 years ago.)

>access to a script for Chrome cleaning. Bleachbit is cross-platform, and works
>on Windows and Linux, and of course, you'd use the actual package to do
>removal.
>
>I like to look at the control file, for references to file structures,
>and for their proposals of what they're going to do. For example, some
>of the coding here, proposes to "vacuum" or defragment an sqlite, rather
>than change the semantic content. The verb "sqlite.vacuum" here, on
>Windows, would correspond to sqlite3.exe some.sqlite .vacuum , and you should
>be exited from the browser (verified via Task Manager), before
>vacuuming anything.

Now you mention it, I _did_ use to have a utility - an add-on to Firefox
- that had an upright vacuum cleaner as its icon. Maybe I can find
something similar for Chrome.

>Presumably Bleachbit (Win version) will have a menu, and "Clean Google Chrome"
>would be just one item in the menu. You don't unleash the entire package
>in any case.
>
>I'm presenting this, to give some idea of the complexity of their
>cleaning process. Not because I expect you to traverse this by hand.
>As far as I know, Chrome uses +++ in the pathname for its DOM storage
>to, but I don't see that here except as a reference to
>$$profile$$/Local Storage/http*localstorage
>and I don't have a Chrome set up right now, so can't tell you
>what's in there :-) I'm so slow at this, you've probably assumed
>(correctly) that I've fallen asleep :-) It's an exciting topic, browser
>cleaning.

I'll just have a look with Everything: Hmm, I have 42 items with +++ in
the filename, such as

C:\Users\Stone\AppData\Roaming\Mozilla\Firefox\Profiles\lmrx7ou1.default-
esr\storage\default\https+++www.findagrave.com

- they're all in that folder. They're all folders. Looking at one, it
contains a file called .metadata-v2 and a folder called ls, which
contains files called data.sqlite and usage (no extension). Would
deleting these do harm? Or good?
>
> /usr/share/bleachbit/cleaners/google_chrome.xml
>
[code kept for reference]
>
>So that is an example of a codified process for browser cleaning.
>AVG could just grab a copy of that and use it, assuming they actually
>verified the correctness of the .XML being used.
>
>Take a backup first, before running BleachBit, then see if Chrome
>still works, afterwards. When running a backup, you want all the
>browsers exited as well -- an easy way to achieve "data at rest" state,

All sounds a bit beyond me.

>is to use your Macrium CD as the OS during the backup. I have a USB stick
>here, dedicated to a copy of the Macrium CD, for this reason. Doing
>offline backups, is to make the most minty fresh backup possible.
>
> Paul

I always do my backup by booting from my Macrium mini-CD - didn't take
too long with Macrium 5, and doesn't with 6. (The 7 - which I had to use
for my friends' recent Windows 10 [5 worked with early W10, not more
recent] takes ages to boot!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of
Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in
Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

In message <u57b1s$3mvd9$1@paganini.bofh.team> at Wed, 31 May 2023
07:29:09, Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> writes
[]
> If you visit a typical commercial webpage you'll find
>links to Google Analytics, and other Google properties.

I used to have a hosts file where I'd included a lot of such. Maybe I'll
build one up again.

>Maybe Facebook. Scorecardresearch. Etc. If they can't
>set a cookie they'll typically give you a dummy image.
>They may be sending you the page through a separate
>CDN network. They may be using Akamai or Amazon to
>handle the load...
> It gets complicated. But yes, if you don't block those
>tracking domains specifically then there are multiple
>entities who know nearly every site you visit. If you
>allow 3rd-party cookies it's more extensive tracking.
>
> Interestingly, I ws at a site recently that wouldn't work
>without 3rd-party cookies. I don't remember now what it
>was. And they didn't tell me. I had to figure it out.

Interesting, but not surprising.
>
> A couple
>of days ago I got an email from my dentist. "Please confirm
>your appt". The confirmation wouldn't work. According to

Strange - so did I, and it's the first time I've had one such! And, the
confirmation wouldn't work - well, it was more like something like
"please click the link below" and there wasn't one.

>NoScript there were something like 9 domains trying to run
>script! All they needed was to read the URL parameters and
>show me a "Confirmed" landing page. I don't know if dentists
>come under US HIPAA, but Google Analytics was one of the
>entities trying to track me in my appt confirmation. There

I imagine we have something similar here.

>were also numerous others. I'm guessing the company the
>use, Nexhealth, has got a side gig going, selling dental
>customer personal data to all those other pigs at the script
>trough.
>
(-: )-:
>
>
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Radio 4 is one of the reasons being British is good. It's not a subset of
Britain - it's almost as if Britain is a subset of Radio 4. - Stephen Fry, in
Radio Times, 7-13 June, 2003.

On 5/31/2023 9:06 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

> All sounds a bit beyond me.
>

https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-portable.zip # A portable, no-install version

https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-setup.exe $ This version installs as normal

There should be a menu, when you run the program,
with selections of activities. On the "google-chrome.xml"
file, it will just run the Windows items in the script.

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/jjBqhm3D/bleachbit-windows.gif

You can see in the example, the Firefox main item, is broken out into individual items.

The Google Chrome one should offer a similar menu of options.

And the Google Chrome ones, will correspond to sections of that XML file.
So the "vacuum" section in the graphical menu, corresponds to the bottom lines
in the XML file.

I just wanted you to understand, that there is a listing of the file areas
it will be working in, if you want to examine such areas on the actual disk,
before the cleaning operation.

Any utility which promises to "delete files" is dangerous. Such a utility
does not necessarily trigger AV interaction either -- the AV may simply assume
the cleaning activity is legitimate.

Remember to check Task Manager, for any running "chrome.exe" type items, so
the file system will not have anything locked before you work one of the
BleachBit items.

Paul

In message <u57nra$2ea9e$1@dont-email.me> at Wed, 31 May 2023 11:07:21,
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
>On 5/31/2023 9:06 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>
>> All sounds a bit beyond me.
>>
>
>https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-portable.
>zip # A portable, no-install version
>
>https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-setup.exe
> $ This version installs as normal
>
>There should be a menu, when you run the program,
>with selections of activities. On the "google-chrome.xml"
>file, it will just run the Windows items in the script.

Thanks; it's about my level of understanding. Seems well-written. It's
taking a while (maybe because I selected the overwrite setting; maybe I
won't do that next time). I was surprised it said the Firefox cache was
bigger than the Chrome one, as I hardly ever use Firefox.

How often do you run it?
>
> [Picture]
>
> https://i.postimg.cc/jjBqhm3D/bleachbit-windows.gif
>
>You can see in the example, the Firefox main item, is broken out into
>individual items.
>
>The Google Chrome one should offer a similar menu of options.

It does.
>
>And the Google Chrome ones, will correspond to sections of that XML file.
>So the "vacuum" section in the graphical menu, corresponds to the bottom lines
>in the XML file.
>
>I just wanted you to understand, that there is a listing of the file areas
>it will be working in, if you want to examine such areas on the actual disk,
>before the cleaning operation.
>
>Any utility which promises to "delete files" is dangerous. Such a utility
>does not necessarily trigger AV interaction either -- the AV may simply assume
>the cleaning activity is legitimate.
>
>Remember to check Task Manager, for any running "chrome.exe" type items, so
>the file system will not have anything locked before you work one of the
>BleachBit items.

Good tip - I did.
>
> Paul
John
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"The great tragedy of science, the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly
fact. - Thomas Henry Huxley

On 5/31/2023 2:19 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <u57nra$2ea9e$1@dont-email.me> at Wed, 31 May 2023 11:07:21, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
>> On 5/31/2023 9:06 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>
>>> All sounds a bit beyond me.
>>>
>>
>> https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-portable.
>> zip    # A portable, no-install version
>>
>> https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-setup.exe
>>       $ This version installs as normal
>>
>> There should be a menu, when you run the program,
>> with selections of activities. On the "google-chrome.xml"
>> file, it will just run the Windows items in the script.
>
> Thanks; it's about my level of understanding. Seems well-written. It's taking a while (maybe because I selected the overwrite setting; maybe I won't do that next time). I was surprised it said the Firefox cache was bigger than the Chrome one, as I hardly ever use Firefox.
>
> How often do you run it?
>>
>>   [Picture]
>>
>>    https://i.postimg.cc/jjBqhm3D/bleachbit-windows.gif
>>
>> You can see in the example, the Firefox main item, is broken out into individual items.
>>
>> The Google Chrome one should offer a similar menu of options.
>
> It does.
>>
>> And the Google Chrome ones, will correspond to sections of that XML file.
>> So the "vacuum" section in the graphical menu, corresponds to the bottom lines
>> in the XML file.
>>
>> I just wanted you to understand, that there is a listing of the file areas
>> it will be working in, if you want to examine such areas on the actual disk,
>> before the cleaning operation.
>>
>> Any utility which promises to "delete files" is dangerous. Such a utility
>> does not necessarily trigger AV interaction either -- the AV may simply assume
>> the cleaning activity is legitimate.
>>
>> Remember to check Task Manager, for any running "chrome.exe" type items, so
>> the file system will not have anything locked before you work one of the
>> BleachBit items.
>
> Good tip - I did.
>>
>>   Paul
> John

1) Cache. Well, the trick with these, is to alter the settings
so the Cache is in RAM. This is why I'm not cleaning a cache today,
because... it doesn't exist any more. Google for a recipe to move Cache
to RAM and then you don't have to clean it. Every time you exit a browser
which keeps Cache in RAM, the content is cleared from first principles.

2) Clean DOM and Cookies. Every couple of days.

Watch your AVG dialog for "how many cookies", and it's still going to record
some. But you may notice some small difference.

Paul

In article <vTQds+c++4dkFwGe@255soft.uk>
"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
> In message <u57nra$2ea9e$1@dont-email.me> at Wed, 31 May 2023 11:07:21,
> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
> >On 5/31/2023 9:06 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> >
> >> All sounds a bit beyond me.
> >>
> >
> >https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-portable.
> >zip # A portable, no-install version
> >
> >https://www.bleachbit.org/download/file/t?file=BleachBit-4.4.2-setup.exe
> > $ This version installs as normal
> >
> >There should be a menu, when you run the program,
> >with selections of activities. On the "google-chrome.xml"
> >file, it will just run the Windows items in the script.
>
> Thanks; it's about my level of understanding. Seems well-written. It's
> taking a while (maybe because I selected the overwrite setting; maybe I
> won't do that next time). I was surprised it said the Firefox cache was
> bigger than the Chrome one, as I hardly ever use Firefox.
>
> How often do you run it?
> >
> > [Picture]
> >
> > https://i.postimg.cc/jjBqhm3D/bleachbit-windows.gif
> >
> >You can see in the example, the Firefox main item, is broken out into
> >individual items.
> >
> >The Google Chrome one should offer a similar menu of options.
>
> It does.
> >
> >And the Google Chrome ones, will correspond to sections of that XML file.
> >So the "vacuum" section in the graphical menu, corresponds to the bottom lines
> >in the XML file.
> >
> >I just wanted you to understand, that there is a listing of the file areas
> >it will be working in, if you want to examine such areas on the actual disk,
> >before the cleaning operation.
> >
> >Any utility which promises to "delete files" is dangerous. Such a utility
> >does not necessarily trigger AV interaction either -- the AV may simply assume
> >the cleaning activity is legitimate.
> >
> >Remember to check Task Manager, for any running "chrome.exe" type items, so
> >the file system will not have anything locked before you work one of the
> >BleachBit items.
>
> Good tip - I did.
> >
> > Paul
> John
> --
> J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
>
> "The great tragedy of science, the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly
> fact. - Thomas Henry Huxley

For the average ignorant user, a sandbox cures these problems. Do a
new boot and all tracking nonsense and/or badware disappears.

I've been online for years using only a sandbox and none of those AVs
or Security programs and have not had a single problem.

The solution is so simple.

In message <u58dbh$2gj5n$1@dont-email.me> at Wed, 31 May 2023 17:14:23,
Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> writes
>On 5/31/2023 2:19 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
[]
(bleachbit)
>> Thanks; it's about my level of understanding. Seems well-written.
>>It's taking a while (maybe because I selected the overwrite setting;
>>maybe I won't do that next time). I was surprised it said the Firefox
>>cache was bigger than the Chrome one, as I hardly ever use Firefox.
>> How often do you run it?
[]
>1) Cache. Well, the trick with these, is to alter the settings
> so the Cache is in RAM. This is why I'm not cleaning a cache today,
> because... it doesn't exist any more. Google for a recipe to move Cache
> to RAM and then you don't have to clean it. Every time you exit a browser
> which keeps Cache in RAM, the content is cleared from first principles.

I did Google that, but all the hits seemed to be talking about using a
RAMdisk, which I don't have (I only have the 4G 7-32 can use; I know
there are wiggles to use more than 4G and use that as RAM, but I haven't
yet [the machine can take 8G], as I'm not yet aware of _speed_
problems).
>
>2) Clean DOM and Cookies. Every couple of days.

I'm a bit wary of just clearing general cookies, as they tend to store
settings for sites, and I'm not sure how to differentiate. DOM, agreed.
>
>Watch your AVG dialog for "how many cookies", and it's still going to record
>some. But you may notice some small difference.
>
> Paul
>
With the free AVG, I'm not sure if I can immediately trigger the report
- I think it comes up at random when they want to try to sell me
something!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You've made a happy man very old. - Stephen Fry, on QI, 2014-10-18

On Thu, 1 Jun 2023 03:18:51 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
wrote:

>I'm a bit wary of just clearing general cookies, as they tend to store
>settings for sites, and I'm not sure how to differentiate. DOM, agreed.
>>

I have my browser set to delete all cookies on close and I deal with
the problems with exceptions. The biggest problem I see is "stay
logged in" doesn't work if you lose the cookie. For most places that
is not an issue. I think I have about a half dozen exceptions.

On 5/31/2023 7:18 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote [in part]:
> I'm a bit wary of just clearing general cookies, as they tend to store
> settings for sites, and I'm not sure how to differentiate. DOM, agreed.

I too do not clear all cookies. Instead, I set the properties on the
file cookies.sqlite to read only after selectively deleting cookies I do
not want.

Occasionally, a retained cookie expires. I terminate my browser and
then change the properties to read-write. I launch my browser, use its
cookie manager to delete the expired cookies, visit only the site that
set that cookie, terminate the browser, and change the properites of
cookies.sqlite back to read-only.

Yes, that can be a lot of work. But it means I have only the cookies I
want.

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Ron DeSantis: Anti-gay, anti-African American, anti-women,
anti-science, anti-education.

In message <2f4h7idf37cnom0g3umhsggevh2uk14l9h@4ax.com> at Thu, 1 Jun
2023 08:43:50, gfretwell@aol.com writes
>On Thu, 1 Jun 2023 03:18:51 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>I'm a bit wary of just clearing general cookies, as they tend to store
>>settings for sites, and I'm not sure how to differentiate. DOM, agreed.
>>>
>
>I have my browser set to delete all cookies on close and I deal with
>the problems with exceptions. The biggest problem I see is "stay
>logged in" doesn't work if you lose the cookie. For most places that
>is not an issue. I think I have about a half dozen exceptions.

OK, that's an approach. I agree, I wouldn't mind not "staying logged in"
between sessions. But generating the exceptions sounds like a faff -
especially as you (or at least I!) probably wouldn't realise they needed
to be excepted until after having lost whatever they were keeping. How
do you decide an exception needs creating?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

History is not the past. It is the method we have evolved of organising our
ignorance of the past. - Hilary Mantel, first Reith Lecture 2017

In message <u5a9j9$2qev4$1@dont-email.me> at Thu, 1 Jun 2023 07:22:30,
David E. Ross <nobody@nowhere.invalid> writes
>On 5/31/2023 7:18 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote [in part]:
>> I'm a bit wary of just clearing general cookies, as they tend to store
>> settings for sites, and I'm not sure how to differentiate. DOM, agreed.
>
>I too do not clear all cookies. Instead, I set the properties on the
>file cookies.sqlite to read only after selectively deleting cookies I do
>not want.
>
>Occasionally, a retained cookie expires. I terminate my browser and
>then change the properties to read-write. I launch my browser, use its
>cookie manager to delete the expired cookies, visit only the site that
>set that cookie, terminate the browser, and change the properites of
>cookies.sqlite back to read-only.
>
>Yes, that can be a lot of work. But it means I have only the cookies I
>want.
>
Another good approach - though as you say, sounds like a lot of work.

I've often wondered, why browsers keep expired cookies: what is their
use? Are they accessible to the site that set them (or any other)?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

History is not the past. It is the method we have evolved of organising our
ignorance of the past. - Hilary Mantel, first Reith Lecture 2017

"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote

| Strange - so did I, and it's the first time I've had one such! And, the
| confirmation wouldn't work - well, it was more like something like
| "please click the link below" and there wasn't one.
|

Yes. I get that. Sometimes it's crap that only works in Chrome.
Sometimes it's things that I've blocked, like Google's gstatic.com,
which make me not see the "I'm not a robot" checkboxes. Much of
it is just really bad web design, aimed at Chrome, done by people
who have no idea how to create a webpage. They're just clicking
and dragging. Much of it now is also aimed at cellphones, as Chrome
itself is. Not having an optional menu bar -- having to use the little
3-dot thing on the far right -- is a design that could only make
sense to people who no longer use computers to go online, using
tiny cellphone screens only. I can only guess that those people
honestly think computer screens bigger than 3"x6" are outdated...
like delivering ice for an icebox or adding an optional crank to start
a car.

I came across another first yesterday. Axvoice, who sell VOIP
service, send email that deliberately thwart text version! Ever since
HTML email came out, nearly all email contains both a plain text
and HTML version. A small number may be text only. (I send
only in plain text, for example.) Email programs then display the
preferred version. Axvoice emails, opened in my default text mode,
say:

"To view the message, please use an HTML compatible email viewer!"

An explanation point... Is this written by, like, a teenager, like?
Has this teenger ever heard of email client software, or does he
think that email is a gift from Google and is a type of webpage?

The real kicker is that the Axvoice email never has any HTML
element. It's just plain text with BR instead of carriage returns. No
formatting. No font colors. No images... Someone in the organization
has apparently decided that text-based email is just plain, like,
very bad evil. Like, worse than, like, stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.

In message <u5ahbv$6d2t$1@paganini.bofh.team> at Thu, 1 Jun 2023
12:35:20, Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> writes
>"J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote
>
>| Strange - so did I, and it's the first time I've had one such! And, the
>| confirmation wouldn't work - well, it was more like something like
>| "please click the link below" and there wasn't one.
>|
>
> Yes. I get that. Sometimes it's crap that only works in Chrome.

I have looked further into this [the email from my dental practice
asking me to fill in a form]. I discovered three things:
1. The plain text part of the email didn't contain the links at all.
2. The HTML part contained them (but see 3), but in graphical form only.
[My email software displays included images, but not online ones.]
3. The first link - to the actual form - didn't actually include the
link (no "href"), though the second one - to the idiot-guide video on
how to fill in the form - did.

>Sometimes it's things that I've blocked, like Google's gstatic.com,
>which make me not see the "I'm not a robot" checkboxes. Much of

Yes, I used to get that.

>it is just really bad web design, aimed at Chrome, done by people
>who have no idea how to create a webpage. They're just clicking

In the case of my dental practice, not even that - they've outsourced
it. They eventually sent me the direct link to the form. Which, when I
filled in surname and DOB, came up with something like "please select
where to send verification code", with only a button for my landline -
no way of either "selecting" anything else, or adding e. g. an email
address. (I tried clicking the button for my landline, but of course
that didn't work. [Don't know why: I _have_ used sites that send a -
spoken - code to my landline. But presumably few know about that.]) Oh,
and at the bottom of this page was a link to "website", which linked to
a non-existent one (a .com rather than .co.uk). I sent them an annotated
screenshot of this form, along with a hint that there may be disability
access legislation aspects to the matter and offering to speak to their
IT provider about the matters; I'm getting hard-assed replies at the
moment, but we'll see.

>and dragging. Much of it now is also aimed at cellphones, as Chrome
>itself is. Not having an optional menu bar -- having to use the little
>3-dot thing on the far right -- is a design that could only make
>sense to people who no longer use computers to go online, using
>tiny cellphone screens only. I can only guess that those people
>honestly think computer screens bigger than 3"x6" are outdated...

Agreed.

>like delivering ice for an icebox or adding an optional crank to start
>a car.

Four and more cars ago I drove several of a make (called Lada in the UK)
which I heard somewhere still could have been cranked, if they hadn't
redesigned the bumper (fender) to not have a suitable hole in it.
(Whether true or not I don't know. They were delightfully basic cars.)
>
> I came across another first yesterday. Axvoice, who sell VOIP
>service, send email that deliberately thwart text version! Ever since

Oh, that's very common. My favourite, must be a few years back now, was
that I was telling the company (FindMyPast, the main competitor to
Ancestry here for genealogical services) that they were sending me
notifications of things increasingly close to, and eventually after, the
closing date, and they were telling me (as companies nearly always do)
that the fault was at my end. Eventually, I discovered - can't remember
how - that the plain text part of their emails has stuck with the
content of one of their newsletters (or whatever they were) from months
ago; since I by choice read the plain text version, that's all I was
seeing!

>HTML email came out, nearly all email contains both a plain text
>and HTML version. A small number may be text only. (I send

And what's more, most companies sending emails (and probably some
individuals too) have no idea that they _are_ sending such two-part
emails (FindMyPast certainly didn't; I didn't even try discussing it
with my dental practice, though if they let me speak to their IT
provider it'll be among the first things I discuss, to assess their
level of competence).

>only in plain text, for example.) Email programs then display the

Me too.

>preferred version. Axvoice emails, opened in my default text mode,
>say:
>
>"To view the message, please use an HTML compatible email viewer!"

Yes, I've seen a ruder version, something like "We tried to send you
this in HTML (pictures and text), but were unsuccessful". Sometimes,
there's a "to view in a web browser, click here".
>
>An explanation point... Is this written by, like, a teenager, like?
>Has this teenger ever heard of email client software, or does he
>think that email is a gift from Google and is a type of webpage?

Well, HTML email _is_ in effect a webpage, isn't it. I suspect that
there may be a hole in the accessibility legislation through which these
fall, though: if we ever get that far, I'll find out.
>
> The real kicker is that the Axvoice email never has any HTML
>element. It's just plain text with BR instead of carriage returns. No
>formatting. No font colors. No images... Someone in the organization
>has apparently decided that text-based email is just plain, like,
>very bad evil. Like, worse than, like, stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.
>
I presume it has the {HTML} etc. tags, though, and if viewed in an HTML
parser, the BRs are translated. (Deliberately used {} there to stop it
being parsed.) Yes, I've seen plenty of such "HTML" emails that in
practice weren't - or, at least, where any such formatting added little
if anything.
>
Auto-generated HTML - which email tends to be - is _my_ version of "very
bad evil"; it's way over-coded, containing far too many nested DIVs, and
even nested TABLEs. Even - not at all rarely - much coding around a
space, whose colour and font of course are meaningless. (OK, font might
affect its width and height. But as it'd often be on a line by itself,
its width at least is meaningless.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

It is complete loose-stool-water, it is arse-gravy of the worst kind
- Stephen Fry on "The Da Vinci Code"

David,

> Occasionally, a retained cookie expires. I terminate my browser and
> then change the properties to read-write. I launch my browser, use its
> cookie manager to delete the expired cookies, visit only the site that
> set that cookie, terminate the browser, and change the properites of
> cookies.sqlite back to read-only.
>
> Yes, that can be a lot of work. But it means I have only the cookies I
> want.

Have you ever thought of just updating the expiry date in the database ?
After all, its just a hint for your browser to discard the cookie.

I could imagine doing it once a month (using a scheduler ?) for all the
cookies in there, setting that expiry date to a month plus a few days from
now ...

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 6/1/2023 10:15 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <u5ahbv$6d2t$1@paganini.bofh.team> at Thu, 1 Jun 2023
> 12:35:20, Newyana2 <Newyana2@invalid.nospam> writes
>> "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote
>>
>> | Strange - so did I, and it's the first time I've had one such! And, the
>> | confirmation wouldn't work - well, it was more like something like
>> | "please click the link below" and there wasn't one.
>> |
>>
>> Yes. I get that. Sometimes it's crap that only works in Chrome.
>
> I have looked further into this [the email from my dental practice
> asking me to fill in a form]. I discovered three things:
> 1. The plain text part of the email didn't contain the links at all.
> 2. The HTML part contained them (but see 3), but in graphical form only.
> [My email software displays included images, but not online ones.]
> 3. The first link - to the actual form - didn't actually include the
> link (no "href"), though the second one - to the idiot-guide video on
> how to fill in the form - did.
>
>> Sometimes it's things that I've blocked, like Google's gstatic.com,
>> which make me not see the "I'm not a robot" checkboxes. Much of
>
> Yes, I used to get that.
>
>> it is just really bad web design, aimed at Chrome, done by people
>> who have no idea how to create a webpage. They're just clicking
>
> In the case of my dental practice, not even that - they've outsourced
> it. They eventually sent me the direct link to the form. Which, when I
> filled in surname and DOB, came up with something like "please select
> where to send verification code", with only a button for my landline -
> no way of either "selecting" anything else, or adding e. g. an email
> address. (I tried clicking the button for my landline, but of course
> that didn't work. [Don't know why: I _have_ used sites that send a -
> spoken - code to my landline. But presumably few know about that.]) Oh,
> and at the bottom of this page was a link to "website", which linked to
> a non-existent one (a .com rather than .co.uk). I sent them an annotated
> screenshot of this form, along with a hint that there may be disability
> access legislation aspects to the matter and offering to speak to their
> IT provider about the matters; I'm getting hard-assed replies at the
> moment, but we'll see.
>
>> and dragging. Much of it now is also aimed at cellphones, as Chrome
>> itself is. Not having an optional menu bar -- having to use the little
>> 3-dot thing on the far right -- is a design that could only make
>> sense to people who no longer use computers to go online, using
>> tiny cellphone screens only. I can only guess that those people
>> honestly think computer screens bigger than 3"x6" are outdated...
>
> Agreed.
>
>> like delivering ice for an icebox or adding an optional crank to start
>> a car.
>
> Four and more cars ago I drove several of a make (called Lada in the UK)
> which I heard somewhere still could have been cranked, if they hadn't
> redesigned the bumper (fender) to not have a suitable hole in it.
> (Whether true or not I don't know. They were delightfully basic cars.)
>>
>> I came across another first yesterday. Axvoice, who sell VOIP
>> service, send email that deliberately thwart text version! Ever since
>
> Oh, that's very common. My favourite, must be a few years back now, was
> that I was telling the company (FindMyPast, the main competitor to
> Ancestry here for genealogical services) that they were sending me
> notifications of things increasingly close to, and eventually after, the
> closing date, and they were telling me (as companies nearly always do)
> that the fault was at my end. Eventually, I discovered - can't remember
> how - that the plain text part of their emails has stuck with the
> content of one of their newsletters (or whatever they were) from months
> ago; since I by choice read the plain text version, that's all I was
> seeing!
>
>> HTML email came out, nearly all email contains both a plain text
>> and HTML version. A small number may be text only. (I send
>
> And what's more, most companies sending emails (and probably some
> individuals too) have no idea that they _are_ sending such two-part
> emails (FindMyPast certainly didn't; I didn't even try discussing it
> with my dental practice, though if they let me speak to their IT
> provider it'll be among the first things I discuss, to assess their
> level of competence).
>
>> only in plain text, for example.) Email programs then display the
>
> Me too.
>
>> preferred version. Axvoice emails, opened in my default text mode,
>> say:
>>
>> "To view the message, please use an HTML compatible email viewer!"
>
> Yes, I've seen a ruder version, something like "We tried to send you
> this in HTML (pictures and text), but were unsuccessful". Sometimes,
> there's a "to view in a web browser, click here".
>>
>> An explanation point... Is this written by, like, a teenager, like?
>> Has this teenger ever heard of email client software, or does he
>> think that email is a gift from Google and is a type of webpage?
>
> Well, HTML email _is_ in effect a webpage, isn't it. I suspect that
> there may be a hole in the accessibility legislation through which these
> fall, though: if we ever get that far, I'll find out.
>>
>> The real kicker is that the Axvoice email never has any HTML
>> element. It's just plain text with BR instead of carriage returns. No
>> formatting. No font colors. No images... Someone in the organization
>> has apparently decided that text-based email is just plain, like,
>> very bad evil. Like, worse than, like, stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.
>>
> I presume it has the {HTML} etc. tags, though, and if viewed in an HTML
> parser, the BRs are translated. (Deliberately used {} there to stop it
> being parsed.) Yes, I've seen plenty of such "HTML" emails that in
> practice weren't - or, at least, where any such formatting added little
> if anything.
>>
> Auto-generated HTML - which email tends to be - is _my_ version of "very
> bad evil"; it's way over-coded, containing far too many nested DIVs, and
> even nested TABLEs. Even - not at all rarely - much coding around a
> space, whose colour and font of course are meaningless. (OK, font might
> affect its width and height. But as it'd often be on a line by itself,
> its width at least is meaningless.)
>

My latest study comparing plain-text E-mail messages versus
HTML-formatted messages was in September 2021. I found that the average
bloat factor for HTML-formatted messages was 15.5 times the size of the
equivalent plain-text content. I also found that HTML-formatted
messages contain an average of 10.0 HTML syntax errors per KB of HTML
markup.

Bloat can be important if you are a business that is required by law to
archive all communications. If the message was broadcast to a large
audience (e.g., a newsletter), bloat also contributes to Internet
congestion.

HTML errors in a message might mean that the entire message can be
clearly and easily read only if the recipient uses the same kind of
E-mail client as did the sender. It might even require that the
recipient use the same version of the same brand of client as the sender.

The complete study report -- including methodology -- is at
<http://www.rossde.com/internet/ASCIIvsHTML.html>.

--
David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Ron DeSantis: Anti-gay, anti-African American, anti-women,
anti-science, anti-education.

Newyana2 wrote on 2/6/23 2:35 am:

<Snip>

> Someone in the organization has apparently decided that text-based
> email is just plain, like, very bad evil. Like, worse than, like,
> stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.

Your last word prompts me to ask ....

It would seem, to me at least, that Pepsi is the little brother to
Coca-Cola, at least here in Australia.

In the home of both companies, the U.S. of A., is Pepsi-Cola the
preferred Cola company over Coca-Cola??
--
Daniel

"David E. Ross" <nobody@nowhere.invalid> wrote

| My latest study comparing plain-text E-mail messages versus
| HTML-formatted messages was in September 2021. I found that the average
| bloat factor for HTML-formatted messages was 15.5 times the size of the
| equivalent plain-text content. I also found that HTML-formatted
| messages contain an average of 10.0 HTML syntax errors per KB of HTML
| markup.
|

Headers have become increasingly large with signatures
and spam reports, so the relative bloat might not be so
noticeable these days. HTML errors? Don't get me started
on MS Word trying to create HTML email. :)

"Daniel65" <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote

| It would seem, to me at least, that Pepsi is the little brother to
| Coca-Cola, at least here in Australia.
| | In the home of both companies, the U.S. of A., is Pepsi-Cola the
| preferred Cola company over Coca-Cola??

That was really just a random choice on my part. "Pepsi"
is less ambiguous than "coke". Back when I was a teenager I
preferred Coke and wouldn't touch a Pepsi. Pepsi was for
some kind of undefined weirdo. People who probably had bad
breath, drove Ramblers and ate Fritos instead of potato chips.
People who put ketchup on hot dogs and mayo on ham
sandwiches. People like that were probably capable of anything.
I steered clear. :)

I'd guess that the two drinks are probably about equal in
popularity. Same with Bud and Miller. (At least until Bud recently
decided to preach trans-rights religion.) One surely sells more
than the other, but both are well known from TV commercials
and therefore deemed normal.

I haven't personally drunk soda for decades. Nor do I drink popular
beers. I brewed my own for several years and got picky about having
a beer that didn't taste like slightly sour dishwater.* But I find it
all interesting in sociological terms. We seem to always have
2 or 3 popular versions of everything, with very little difference
between them. That allows everyone to identify with a harmless
choice. So we can broadcast conformity and individuality at the
same time. "I'm an individualist, so I just bought this shirt with a
Nike logo." Ironically, Americans are generally obsessed with both
individuality and conformity. Most people are happy if their only
choice is Coke or Pepsi; Bud or Miller. But if you only offered 1
choice... Well, that's communism, isn't it?

Myself, I'm a plainclothes hippie, eating mostly real food,
rarely having any kind of snack food or popular drink... I even
eschew hipster brands that are offficially anti-mainstream. For
example, Pepsi owns "Pure Leaf Tea" and Coke owns "Honest Tea",
both with allegedly organic options. Both natural and environment-
supporting. Both aimed at the sophisticated hipster market and
at college kids who want their parents to care about the
environment by buying them a Tesla.

"Buy our organic tea now and show that you're a hipster with
multi-paradigmatic awareness! Buy it for way too much money,
in a glass bottle that will never be recycled! Show that you care!"

You have to admit that for all the good things about other
countries, no one surpasses the US for our dogged persistence
in buying name brand stuff that we don't need. Maybe that's
because our sense of identity is delicate. We're a country of
immigrants, and like Australia, don't even have our own language.
But we have lots of trademarks and logos.

* Interesting story there about factory beer. Miller is famous
for clear bottles, which results in fast skunking of the beer.
(The hop oils go rancid and smell like a skunk.) Rather than change
the bottles, Miller went into the lab and created a non-volatile
hop derivative to replace actual hops. Corona, a popular pseudo-
Mexican beer, is probably the same, since that's also a watery
blend in clear bottles... The wonders of technology.

I suppose
your version of popular tasteless beer would be Fosters. Maybe
a bit more flavorful than Bud/Miller/Coors, but not by much. Though
I liked it when I was young, for its similarity to old fashioned oil cans.
There was a rough and rugged quality to the graphics on the can.
No nonsense.

On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 21:05:04 +1000, Daniel65
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>Newyana2 wrote on 2/6/23 2:35 am:
>
><Snip>
>
>> Someone in the organization has apparently decided that text-based
>> email is just plain, like, very bad evil. Like, worse than, like,
>> stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.
>
>Your last word prompts me to ask ....
>
>It would seem, to me at least, that Pepsi is the little brother to
>Coca-Cola, at least here in Australia.
>
>In the home of both companies, the U.S. of A., is Pepsi-Cola the
>preferred Cola company over Coca-Cola??

The USA is a big country, and customs vary depending what part of the
country you are talking about. Pepsi was originally launched as the
cheaper alternative to Coca Cola, and that legacy lingers to some
degree; it is often seen as the off-brand alternative to Coca Cola.
But in parts of the country - the South, parts of the mid-West - it is
the more popular and common brand.

(IIRC, PepsiCo also has a bigger repitoire of brands under its
umbrella than does Coke, and is a larger company overall. But Coca
Cola (the soda) is served/purchased more than Pepsi in the US.)

And that doesn't even get into the question of what to call the damn
stuff: pop, cola, coke, pepsi, soda, fizzy-tooth-rotter, whatever.
Depending on what you ask for and where can get you different things.
USA is a weird place.

On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 21:05:04 +1000, Daniel65
<daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>Newyana2 wrote on 2/6/23 2:35 am:
>
><Snip>
>
>> Someone in the organization has apparently decided that text-based
>> email is just plain, like, very bad evil. Like, worse than, like,
>> stale Twinkies or warm Pepsi.
>
>Your last word prompts me to ask ....
>
>It would seem, to me at least, that Pepsi is the little brother to
>Coca-Cola, at least here in Australia.
>
>In the home of both companies, the U.S. of A., is Pepsi-Cola the
>preferred Cola company over Coca-Cola??

No, the opposite is true, but not by a lot. Both are very popular,