Talk:SimilarWeb/Archives/2018
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Should mention be made of the recent Stylish browser extension security issues and subsequent banning as spyware from the Chrome web store and Mozilla Add-ons? From what I can tell, SimilarWeb purchased Stylish or the company that owned it, added the tracking components to it that caused it to be identified as spyware, was caught, and the extension banned. The pre-spyware fork of the project, Stylus, currently has 60,000 users. Since Stylish itself has been pulled it's difficult to tell how many users there actually were at the time of its eviction, but it seems it was very popular and the malicious behavior would have affected a non-trivial number of people. I think engaging in such practices, especially at scale, is probably worthy of mention on the main page. What do you think?
- Verifiability is important so you would need to have references. If you can cite such references, be bold, learn how to edit an article correctly, and add the information you believe is relevant. On the surface, it sounds relevant to me if there are references to support what you wrote. - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 06:47, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- The related Stylish article has a section detailing the info and providing sources. Should those sources be cited here as well, or would it be sufficient to provide a link to that section of the other page? (It's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stylish#Privacy_issues) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.187.112.17 (talk) 16:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC)