After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 455504 - Privacy preferences are confusing
Privacy preferences are confusing
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE of bug 172652
Product: epiphany
Classification: Core
Component: Preferences
2.18.x
Other All
: Normal minor
: ---
Assigned To: Epiphany Maintainers
Marco Pesenti Gritti
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2007-07-10 11:05 UTC by trollord
Modified: 2012-10-08 02:38 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: 2.17/2.18



Description trollord 2007-07-10 11:05:03 UTC
1. Being able to enable/disable popups and Java are primarily usability issues (to prevent annoyances), not privacy. Yet they are on a tab called "privacy". I would rename this to something that encompasses both.

2. Not being able to whitelist certain sites to be able to make popups and run Java causes the user to have to visit the preferences dialogs to enable/disable the options unnecessarily often. Also, it gets confusing when you have multiple tabs open simultaneously and you don't want to enable or disable the features for all of the tabs. In fact, it's nearly impossible.

3. The only way to set Epiphany to throw away all cookies when you close the browser is via about:config ? 

Other information:
Irrelevant for the bug report, but I am a new Epiphany user. I did not use it before because it was horrible to use (lack of adblock) but I have just begun using it and I actually like it over the Firefox already. Just couple tiny tweaks and it will be simply superb!
Comment 1 Jean-François Fortin Tam 2012-10-08 02:38:04 UTC
Security issues can turn into privacy invasions, so unless the devs decide to move those three checkboxes to the General tab, I doubt this will change.

For the whitelist approach, I think bug #172652 is the way to go.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 172652 ***