[macOS] Offline TrafficLight database

SaurikSI · 2022-11-10T22:27:03+00:00

There was an error rendering this rich post.

I tried Bitdefender for Mac today, and decided to try its TrafficLight extension that checks the safety of websites. As I always do, for privacy reasons, I used a proxy to intercept the traffic and see what data, if any, Bitdefender sends to work.

Unfortunately, TrafficLight sends every URL to Bitdefender for checking, which makes me uncomfortable for obvious reasons, even if Bitdefender doesn't save that data, it's still a privacy problem that such sensitive information is sent to Bitdefender.

For this reason, I propose an alternative that can really be implemented: Offline databases.

Just like virus definitions, you should implement a way that TrafficLight works offline, regularly updating the database that your servers use but for local use, inside the machine. This would not only be very beneficial for privacy-conscious users like me, but also would reduce costs for Bitdefender, as this feature wouldn't require requests for every URL all the time we browse.

Find more posts tagged with

Declined

privacy

macos

trafficlight

online privacy

Status: Declined

Comments

Flexx

https://community.bitdefender.com/en/discussion/94101/macos-offline-trafficlight-database

While this may sound like a good idea but we all know that extension try to slow down the browsing speed of a particular web browser.

Cloud scanning is a faster way when it comes to blocking a website since if bitdefender will create a offline database available, there are more than millions of malicious & phishing website on the web today and when someone will enter a website in the url bar the traffic light extension will have to search the complete set of database first to check if the website is malicious or not and then block it or allow it to load.

In my personal opinion from the past, bitdefender developers may not implement this feature. But lets see what @Alexandru_BD & @Mike_BD think of this.

Regards

SaurikSI

https://community.bitdefender.com/en/discussion/comment/317991#Comment_317991

I agree this idea isn't perfect, it has a tradeoff, that's why I'm not saying this should be a replacement, but an optional mode if you care about privacy like me.

In my personal opinion from the past, bitdefender developers may not implement this feature.

Yes, in my personal experience it's the same, I probably made the most voted and seen feature request ever created on this forum, with several users explaining that I was completely right, yet they constantly refused to implement it no matter what, even if that's what users all around the web were looking for.

But still, I'll give them a chance, maybe they will implement my request this time.

Alexandru_BD

Hello @SaurikSI and thank you for your suggestion.

When it comes to the Traffic Light extension, this is how the services we have for traffic verification operate and there's technically no better way to do it for now. And when I say this, I mean a more efficient and reliable way, that also leaves room for future developments.

The developers have no other viable options and as far as I know, the reasoning behind the current functionality is related to the level of protection offered. This is the best option.

However, maybe in the near future a new feasible technology will be available, that is not based on a call to our servers for each URL. We cannot predict that, but surely if an upgrade is possible here, the developers will be the first to jump on it.

Should you have any privacy concerns, kindly check our Privacy Policy for Home User Solutions here, that explains the personal data we collect, how and where we may use it, how we protect it, who has access to it, with whom we share it, and how you may correct it.

Regards