Tracking Protection Tiers: What Each Setting Blocks
Every mainstream browser now offers some form of tracking protection, and almost nobody knows which tier theirs is on. That is the first thing to fix, because the difference between "standard" and "strict" is often the difference between blocking known advertising domains and blocking cross-site tracking outright.
The settings live in roughly the same place everywhere: Privacy and security in Chrome, Privacy and Security then Enhanced Tracking Protection in Firefox, Privacy in Safari, and Privacy, search and services in Edge. Each browser also offers a per-site override, which is the part people miss: when a strict setting breaks a login or a payment page, the answer is to disable protection for that one site temporarily, not to weaken the global setting.
| Approach | What it stops | What it does not stop |
|---|---|---|
| Standard or balanced tracking protection | Known advertising and analytics domains from lists | Cross-site identifiers from domains not yet on a list; first-party profiling; server-side events |
| Strict protection | Third-party trackers, many third-party cookies and referrers, some fingerprinting surfaces | Fingerprinting in general; anything first-party; server-side matching |
| Cookie partitioning (Firefox Total Cookie Protection, Chrome CHIPS) | Joining your identity across sites using a third-party cookie | Profiling within one site; fingerprinting; login-based linking |
| A content-blocking extension | Requests to blocklisted hosts, including scripts and pixels | Requests the browser makes itself; first-party endpoints; server-side transfers |
| Encrypted DNS with a filtering resolver | Seeing and rewriting your DNS queries; some tracker domains | Everything above the DNS layer, including the content of your traffic |
The honest summary: these layers reduce collection and make cross-site linking harder. None of them makes profiling impossible, and the mechanism that most reliably defeats all of them - a server-to-server event keyed on your hashed email address - never touches your browser at all. See how online tracking works for that.
Why Partitioning Helps More Than Blocking
Blocking third-party cookies outright can break embedded content: a comment widget loses your session, a payment iframe forgets your cart, a video player refuses to start. Partitioning is the compromise that keeps sites working while removing the tracking value.
Instead of one identifier shared across every site that embeds the same network, partitioning gives each top-level site its own cookie jar for that embed. The widget still remembers you while you are on site A. When the same widget loads on site B, it receives a different jar, so it cannot tell that both visits came from the same browser. The state is preserved; the join is severed.
Firefox calls this Total Cookie Protection and has it on by default. Chrome's version, CHIPS, is opt-in for developers and applies to cookies explicitly marked as partitioned. Safari took a different route: it blocks third-party cookies and additionally restricts script-set first-party cookies to a short lifetime, on the theory that any cookie a script writes is more likely to be for tracking than for function.
What partitioning cannot do is stop a company that also sees you first-party. If you are signed into an advertising platform's own services, that account is a first-party identity, and partitioning has nothing to separate.
Content Blocking and Extension Hygiene
A content blocker is the single most effective browser-level change available, and also the most common way people accidentally hand a stranger everything they do.
Choosing one
- Prefer a blocker that publishes its filter lists, has a public source repository, and states its funding model. A blocker with no visible funding is being funded by something.
- Prefer one that blocks requests at the network layer rather than injecting scripts into pages, because injected scripts run with the page's own permissions.
- Be cautious with "acceptable ads" programmes. A default that allows some advertising requests is a business decision, not a technical limit, and you can usually turn it off.
The permission problem
Extensions run with the permissions they request, and most request the maximum. An extension that can "read and change all your data on all websites" can read your bank balance, your email and your session cookies, because it runs inside the pages where those exist. Anyone who can publish an update to it can change what it does with that access, and updates arrive automatically.
Practical rules that follow from that:
- Look at the list before you add anything. Most people are carrying five extensions from experiments they do not remember.
- Re-read permissions after major updates. A blocker that adds "read your browsing history" is not the same product it was.
- Set site access to on-click where the extension allows it. It then acts only when you invoke it, which is usually enough and removes its standing access to every page.
- Prefer one broad blocker to five narrow ones. Fewer extensions means less attack surface, fewer permissions and a less distinctive fingerprint.
- Remove what you do not use. An installed extension you have forgotten is still running, still updating, and still holding its permissions.
Encrypted DNS and HTTPS-Only Mode
Two settings reduce what the network between you and the site can see, and they are worth having even though neither is a privacy solution on its own.
DNS over HTTPS
Every visit begins with a DNS lookup: converting example.com into an IP address. Sent in the clear over older protocols, that query is visible to your internet provider, your employer and anyone on the same network, and it is a surprisingly complete record of where you go, because it happens for every domain you contact, including the ones embedded in pages.
DNS over HTTPS (DoH) wraps that lookup inside an encrypted HTTPS connection to a resolver you choose, so the local network cannot read or rewrite it. Browsers support it directly - in Firefox under Privacy and Security, in Chrome and Edge under Privacy and security, then Security. You can also set it at the router, which covers every device in the house including televisions and consoles that have no setting of their own.
The trade is straightforward and worth stating: your local network stops seeing your queries, and the resolver you pick sees all of them instead. Choosing a resolver with a published, audited no-logging policy moves trust rather than eliminating it. A resolver that also filters known tracker and malware domains adds a second benefit, and is what most people want in practice.
HTTPS-only mode
An unencrypted HTTP request can be read and modified in transit. HTTPS-only mode makes the browser attempt the secure version of every address and refuse to fall back silently. It is a switch in most browsers, sometimes under Privacy and security. Expect some breakage on legacy sites and captive portals; the per-site exception exists for that reason, and a captive portal is not a reason to turn the setting off globally.
Neither setting hides your IP address from the sites you visit, and neither changes what those sites do with your data once it arrives. They address the network layer only.
Profiles and Containers Beat Clearing Data
"Clear cookies" is the most common privacy habit and one of the least effective. It logs you out of everything, changes your fingerprint for the worse by making your storage state unusual, and the profile held by the company that already recognised you is not deleted - only your local copy is.
Better: keep your browsing separated so that unrelated activity never shares a cookie jar in the first place.
- Browser profiles. Every major browser supports multiple profiles with separate cookies, logins, extensions and history. A common arrangement: one profile for accounts that identify you, one for shopping, one for reading. Starting a fresh profile for a specific purchase stops the whole history of your casual browsing from being attached to it.
- Firefox containers. The Multi-Account Containers extension goes further inside a single window: each container is a separate cookie store, so you can be signed into the same site in two containers as two different users. Assigning a container to a category of site - banking, social, shopping - means those identities never mix.
- Separate browsers, not just windows. A private window shares the same fingerprint as the ordinary one, and closing it does not undo what was already observed during the session.
The benefit is not anonymity; it is containment. Data accumulated in one profile cannot be joined to the data in another, which is precisely the join that identity graphs depend on.
Search Choice and the Fingerprinting Paradox
Your search engine is a profile of your intentions - what you are worried about, what you are buying, what you are planning - and it is the most intimate record most people generate. Changing it is a genuine improvement, and also a good example of how a privacy choice can cut the other way.
Search engines differ in what they log and how long they keep it. Some log queries against an account and retain them for a long period; some offer a short retention window; some describe themselves as not associating queries with a persistent identifier at all. Read the current policy rather than a summary, because the terms change and the summaries do not.
Two less obvious points:
- Use your browser's default search box, not a search site. Typing a query into a search page means that page learns what you typed before you navigate; in the address bar, the query goes only to the engine you configured. It also avoids loading a page full of third-party requests before you have chosen a result.
- Beware the settings you change. A browser with modified search, unusual extensions, spoofed user-agent strings and randomised canvas outputs may be more identifiable than a plain one, because very few people share that exact combination. This is the fingerprinting paradox described in how tracking works.
The practical resolution is boring: use a mainstream, current browser, make a small number of deliberate changes, and accept that standing out is a bigger risk than being ordinary.
Phone Settings Worth Changing
A phone is a sensor platform with a payment method attached. These are the changes that make a measurable difference, roughly in order of value.
| Turn off tracking requests | On iOS: Settings, Privacy and Security, Tracking, and switch off "Allow Apps to Request to Track". This is stronger than declining prompts one by one, and apps that relied on the prompt lose the identifier entirely. On Android, delete the advertising ID under Settings, Privacy, Ads - the path varies by manufacturer - after which apps requesting it receive zeros. |
|---|---|
| Review location per app | Set everything that is not navigation, transport, delivery or fitness to Approximate or While Using. Section by section, not app by app - see app permissions and data minimisation. |
| Limit photo access | Photo libraries carry EXIF data: capture time, and often precise GPS coordinates. Grant selected-photos access rather than the full library, or use apps built on the system photo picker, which needs no permission at all. |
| Set an auto-delete window on account activity | If you hold a major platform account, its activity controls let you auto-delete web, app, location and YouTube history after three or eighteen months instead of keeping it indefinitely. This matters more than ad personalisation, because it changes what exists rather than what is shown. |
| Turn off ad personalisation separately | Worth doing, and much weaker than people expect. It changes which ad you see, not whether your activity is collected or how long it is kept. |
| Lock the device properly | A six-digit or alphanumeric passcode, a short auto-lock, and biometrics with a strong passcode fallback. Everything else on the device is only as private as that one control. |
| Audit sign-in sessions | Most platform accounts list every device currently signed in, with location and last activity. Reviewing that list catches the case that matters: an account opened somewhere you have never been. |
What none of this changes: an app that already has your email address, a service you signed into, and data already collected and shared before you changed the setting. Revoking a permission stops future collection; it is not retroactive. The limitation is real and worth understanding before concluding that the settings did not work.
VPNs, Honestly
A virtual private network encrypts your traffic between your device and the VPN provider's server, and makes that server's IP address the one the sites you visit see. That is what it does. Almost everything else in the marketing is aspiration.
What a VPN is genuinely good for
- Untrusted networks. Hotel, airport and cafe Wi-Fi. Even with HTTPS everywhere, a VPN removes the local network's ability to see which domains you contact and to tamper with the connections that are not encrypted.
- Hiding your address from the sites you visit, and from your internet provider, to the extent that you trust the VPN operator instead.
- Reducing location-based price and content differences, which is a commercial effect rather than a privacy one.
What a VPN does not do
- It does not make you anonymous. You have moved your trust from the internet provider to the VPN company, which now sees every connection you make. A free VPN is a business that needs a revenue model, and the model is often the data.
- It does not stop cookies, fingerprinting, or first-party profiling. The site still recognises your browser, and the account you sign into is still you.
- It is not security software. It does not stop malware, phishing or a stolen session cookie.
- It does not hide your activity from a signed-in platform. Logging into the same account through a different IP address changes nothing about what that platform knows.
The reasonable posture: use a paid VPN with a published, independently audited no-logs policy when you are on a network you do not control, or when you specifically want your address hidden from a site. Do not use one as a substitute for the settings in this guide, and do not assume that paying for a VPN makes you unidentifiable.
Questions readers ask about this page
What is the most effective browser privacy setting I can change today?
Move tracking protection to its strictest tier and install one reputable content blocker. Those two changes stop the largest volume of cross-site requests. After that, set an encrypted DNS resolver with filtering, turn on HTTPS-only mode, and keep separate browser profiles for accounts, shopping and general reading so unrelated activity never shares a cookie jar.
Will strict tracking protection break websites?
Occasionally, and usually a login, a payment iframe or a video player. The answer is the per-site exception: disable protection for that one domain while you need it, then turn it back on. Weakening the global setting because one site misbehaves is the common mistake.
Do I need a VPN?
Not for everyday browsing on your own network. A paid VPN with a published no-logs policy is genuinely useful on untrusted Wi-Fi, or when you want a site to see a different IP address. It does not stop cookies, fingerprinting, or the platform you are signed into from recognising you, and a free VPN simply moves your data to a different company.
Does clearing cookies protect my privacy?
Less than people think, and it has costs. It logs you out everywhere, makes your browser state more distinctive, and does not delete the profile the company already built. Separating your browsing into profiles or containers prevents the join from happening in the first place, which is the more durable fix.
Is a private or incognito window useful at all?
Yes, as local cleanup. It keeps the session's cookies and history off your device, logs you out of your existing accounts, and in Chrome blocks third-party cookies that ordinary windows allow. It does not hide your activity from your network, your internet provider, or the sites you visit, and it does not change your fingerprint.
Sources checked for this page
- Mozilla - Enhanced Tracking Protection in Firefox
- Mozilla - Total Cookie Protection and website breakage
- Apple - Prevent cross-site tracking in Safari
- Google Chrome Help - delete, allow and manage cookies
- Chrome for Developers - Cookies Having Independent Partitioned State (CHIPS)
- Mozilla - DNS over HTTPS in Firefox
- EFF Surveillance Self-Defense - choosing the VPN that is right for you
About RAJA89
RAJA89 is an independent educational project written by one person. It is not a company, an agency or a managed editorial team, and it does not pretend to be one. Edi Rahmadani writes these pages, checks them against the primary sources cited on each one, and answers corrections sent to the address on the support page.
RAJA89 is the name the site publishes under; the name above is the person accountable for what it says. Nothing here is generated and published unread: a claim either traces to a source you can open yourself, or it is marked as the author's own judgement.
How this site is funded
It is not. There is no advertising, no sponsorship, no affiliate link, no paid placement and no product for sale anywhere on this site. No company pays to be mentioned, and no page carries a commission-bearing link. Hosting is paid for out of the author's own pocket, which is the whole of the commercial relationship. If that ever changes, the change will be disclosed on this page before it appears anywhere else.
How to read this site
- Primary sources only. Where a claim can be checked, it links to the standards body, regulator or vendor documentation that supports it — not to another summary of it.
- Limits are stated. Where a control fails, or a setting only partly helps, the page says so in the same breath as the advice.
- Country-specific answers are labelled. Reporting routes, consumer protections and privacy law differ by country, so a passage that applies in only one is marked as such.
- No fear as a sales tool. Scaring a reader into a purchase is the behaviour this site exists to argue against.
Editorial standards we hold ourselves to
- We do not quote a statistic without naming the report and its year.
- We do not name a step-by-step settings path unless the vendor's own documentation still shows it.
- We do not present a product as the answer. Where a category of tool helps, we describe the category and what to look for in it.
- We do not write in the voice of expertise we do not have. When a question needs a lawyer, a doctor or a regulator, the page says so and stops.
- We do not silently rewrite a substantive claim. Material corrections are recorded with a dated note on the page, as described on the support page.
Dates, and what they mean
The date below is the last time these pages were re-checked against the sources they cite. It is a record of what happened, not a schedule: no page here states a calendar interval for review, because a static site cannot enforce one. Pages are re-checked when something they describe actually changes — a vendor renames a setting, a standard is revised, a regulation is amended, a link breaks — and at least once a year regardless, so that nothing is left unexamined through neglect.
The date moves only when a person has re-opened the cited sources and confirmed the text still matches them. It is not the date a file was last saved. Where a passage has been left standing but is no longer certain, it is marked as uncertain rather than quietly carried forward.
If the date below looks old, that is information, not a fault. It means the pages are due for their next pass. Everything on them links its primary source precisely so you can check the current position yourself rather than relying on our copy of it.
Who is accountable for this page
| Published by | RAJA89, an independent educational project written and paid for by Edi Rahmadani |
|---|---|
| Written by | Edi Rahmadani — an independent writer, publishing under the RAJA89 name. No employer, qualification or years of experience is claimed here, because this site asserts only what can be checked. |
| Reviewed by | Edi Rahmadani. This site has no separate reviewer, and we do not name one to look better. Every page is self-reviewed against the sources it cites, and that is exactly what the review record below means. |
| Corrections | Send a correction — specific reports are checked against a primary source and fixed or answered |
| First published | 2026-10-08 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-10-08 — every page on this site carries the same review date, and each one links the sources it was checked against |
Contact
Corrections, factual disputes, reports of a link that now leads somewhere harmful, and notices that a described setting has moved are all welcome at the address below. Edi Rahmadani reads them.
We will never ask you for a password, a one-time code, a recovery code or remote access to your device, and we will never ask you to confirm account details by replying to a message. Any message claiming to come from this site and asking for any of that is not from us.
Scope and limitations
Read this before acting on anything here.
- This is general education, not advice for your situation. It explains how data collection and privacy controls generally work, and which rights a reader may have. It is not legal advice and reading it creates no professional relationship. It is not an assessment of your situation: we do not know your accounts, devices, employer policies or past breaches. And it is not anonymity — reducing a footprint lowers how much is collected and how easily it is linked to you, and it cannot erase what has already been gathered or sold.
- We cannot see your accounts or your devices. We cannot tell you whether a particular message you received is genuine, whether an account has been compromised, or what an organisation holds about you.
- We cannot act on your behalf. We cannot contact a platform, bank, regulator or data protection authority for you, and we cannot investigate anyone. Requests like that have to go to the provider directly.
- Menus move. Settings are renamed, moved and reset by updates. A click path that was accurate on the review date may look different in your version. Treat every step here as a description of what to look for rather than a guarantee of what you will see.
- We can be wrong. Errors get through. If you find one, the support page explains what happens next.