Disable Referrer Headers In Firefox

**anon** · 11.09.09, 17:50

Yes, that can indeed happen. But with RefControl you can make it so that only specific sites see no referer headers or forged ones.

**Renk** · 20.09.09, 00:42

Originally Posted by anon

If you're talking about "Forge", I have just checked that out, and if you click a link from www.a.com to www.b.com, B will see:

Code:

Referer: http://www.b.com/

I think that unless you've visited B during your session, it looks a bit suspicious if a page refers you to itself out of nowhere, specially if there's no link to "/" on its homepage.

I agree. Moreover, on some site as... SourceForge (!) the download links are broken by "forging" the referer....

So, I agree with your "third party" trick. But why block ? Why not forge for third party ?

**anon** · 20.09.09, 00:43

Because of the reason mentioned in that same quote

...unless you've visited B during your session, it looks a bit suspicious if a page refers you to itself out of nowhere, specially if there's no link to "/" on its homepage.

Source "Forge", I just got it... no problems with SF and disabled referers here, so you can just go for block.

**Renk** · 21.09.09, 02:51

Originally Posted by anon

Because of the reason mentioned in that same quote

You are right again... I had misinterpreted the Refcontrol's feature. Sometimes, after some hour, I had better to sleep.

Source "Forge", I just got it... no problems with SF and disabled referers here, so you can just go for block.

Indeed, after verification, it's the "forge" feature that breaks the downloads on SF, with and without "3rd party" enabled.

With one of these feature, I get (when eg trying to DL emule 0.49c):

The "eMule/0.49c/eMule0.49c-Sources.zip" file could not be found or is not available. Please select another file.

So, "forge" seems definitively be a bad option in RefControl. I will follow your advice (Block + 3rd party).

**MiCRON** · 10.10.09, 09:06

Wow, I didn't know tracker admins would go this deep attacking members' privacy just to ban them. Anyway, does if I create two separate profiles in firefox where one is used just for browsing the mentioned weird-scary trackers, would that be enough?

**alpacino** · 10.10.09, 09:49

Originally Posted by MiCRON

Wow, I didn't know tracker admins would go this deep attacking members' privacy just to ban them. Anyway, does if I create two separate profiles in firefox where one is used just for browsing the mentioned weird-scary trackers, would that be enough?

Yes, that should be enough.

**anon** · 10.10.09, 12:38

alpacino is right.

You can even run both profiles at the same time via a command-line parameter, for example:

Code:

"C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\firefox.exe" -P "Trackers" -no-remote

**MiCRON** · 10.10.09, 13:26

Nice! Now, since what.cd was involved, is it true they can detect if you have been a member before? I mean, has anyone seen a case like that?

**anon** · 10.10.09, 13:27

is it true they can detect if you have been a member before?

Not if you take the usual precautions. Using a different browser would also be nice.

**MiCRON** · 10.10.09, 23:37

How about records? Are your previous IPs and emails stored in the database?

**anon** · 10.10.09, 23:38

Yes, they are:
http://www.sb-innovation.de/showthre...threadid=14576

**MiCRON** · 11.10.09, 16:11

Now that's bad news. haha! Guess there's no going back to What.

**kazuya** · 27.10.09, 15:08

I find another option to block referrer,trough Firewall Outpost,go to settings,web control,customize.you can select between 3 options,allow,block or prompt