TrackerControl — a way to neutralize in-app trackers

You know that you can select which tracker should be blocked and which not fir every app ?
In moment you can’t only release ‘all trackers from each company’. The separation of each tracker is on the todo.list

1 Like

A root version or magisK modul is on the wish list :smiley:

I think that this is in the works – see below

@ecs I might have missed it, but I don’t see any connection between the Microsoft Exchange Support thread you referenced and this thread about firewalls.

Gael’s comment “…we have a tracker blocker in the development pipe for 2020.” This was incidental to the Exchange Support issue, because they decided to drop Exchange Support development in /e/ (for now) and recommended that if you needed Exchange, you use the Outlook or similar app with a tracker blocker.

I re-read the comment and it makes perfect sense now - not sure how I missed it the first time.
Anyway, that looks promising - I’m very curious to know how this will be implemented. I recall CM/LOS were never very keen on integrating features that blocked permissions or app functions due to the fear of backlash from the app developers. Their posture changed somewhat once App Ops was introduced by Google itself, but I never saw any serious focus put into it. PrivacyGuard for example, is pretty much broken, doesn’t work half the time, and doesn’t hold a candle to Xprivacy. I hope /e/ can address this deficit.

2 Likes

Could you give more information about this? I have a positive attitude towards Privacy Guard, but it is really difficult to evaluate its efficiency.

I stopped using Privacy Guard because I had too many surprises with it. I found it unreliable to the point of being worthless. I haven’t gone back to verify if they’ve fixed the issues with Privacy Guard. I pretty much wrote it off, since the CM/LoS teams have historically not wanted to rock the boat too much when it came to privacy-related issues, ever since they backtracked in CM9 due to pressure from “the powers that be”, and Cyanogen himself being against the idea of feeding apps fake data.

You can read more about just some the issues with Privacy Guard here:

@Manoj I’m not sure if the /e/ team is aware of these issues with PG, but it would be really great if the /e/ team took a look at what is wrong with PG and maybe allocate some energy into fixing the issues with it, because the LOS team doesn’t seem to be doing much about it. It seems like a rather fundamental thing to ensure is working properly for the mission of /e/ to be a success.

2 Likes

Thanks! Previously, my criteria for selecting custom ROM were the signature spoofing for MicroG and the Privacy Guard integration, but now it seems I will give up one of these points.

Yesterday I have gotten the latest version from Konrad. He has made a lot of changes and improvements.

1 Like