Re: [Vimprobable-users] Web Storage Patch

[Daniel C. <dan...@gm...>]

Jan Niemeyer <ma...@ja...> wrote:
> I guess there are non-evil uses for Web Storage. Matt named a good example.
> And I like the idea. But can you name a website you regularly visit, that
> relies on it? I can't.

I don't use any website that would not work if the local storage and html5
database are disabled. And I assume that every serious website or online shop
will pay attention to allow also useragent that don't support all htm5
features, accept of google.

> As these are stored without time limits and Webkit doesn't provide any means
> to control their storage, I went for turning off Web Storage per default.
> But I only tried it for some days, so I wouldn't recommend it for now. 

Personally I'd prefer to keep the default that also webkit uses and let the
user decide if these storages are useful or not.

> Besides, I doubt it makes it much harder to track you, when you use a
> useragent that's, let's say, not very common ;)

I think if you use a useragen that's no very common or that only you use,
makes it easier to track you, event if cookies, JavaScript, and the html5
storages are disabled, only by your useragent.

It's a hard way to keep anonymous in the web, even if html5 storages are
disabled. If you are interested in this you can test what's trackable of you
on http://samy.pl/evercookie/.

Daniel