Google Chrome 104: patches essential safety concern and a concern that’s exploited

@Iron Coronary heart

Oh Hello

> Partitions of textual content (one thing you say I write, whilst you write the longest by far)

Solely in reply to your posts although, since you preserve posting traces of textual content spreading misinformation and concern mongering BS in regards to the Firefox browser.

> A browser with amateurish website isolation

In line with you, However you’re a no person. It is not uncommon data that Firefox in all fairness safe because it has been independently audited many occasions (Which might be greater than what you may say for courageous or vivaldi) and will get nowhere close to the safety issues, patches and fixes that chromium primarily based browsers do.

Firefox truly does have website isolation safety structure that gives real safety regardless of your BS claims or claims from that silly weblog you seemingly usually are not allowed to spam anymore.

> Proprietary just isn’t the identical as insecure. The previous implies that the code just isn’t public

Proprietary code is simply maintained by a small group thus many tech specialists see such code as not as safe as FOSS code, which will be noticed and maintained by a a lot bigger group beneath a sort of peer evaluate course of, which may be very not like a small lazy group that by no means will get peer reviewed by a wider FOSS group. * [Editor: removed, stay polite, please]. Many safety professionals value their salt will all the time want FOSS.

> Chromium is open supply,

Nonetheless constructed primarily for proprietary browsers like chrome and edge thus it’s crap, as a result of chromium just isn’t actually FOSS in a significant sense. Most FOSS purposes are designed with wonderful privateness in thoughts. Google or M$ being concerned with FOSS is and all the time might be an absolute joke to many.

> Google has a big group as properly. So does Microsoft. And the open supply Chromium code is vastly extra used and audited than Firefox.

Chrome and Edge are proprietary * [Editor: removed, stay polite, please], not FOSS. Chromium primarily based browsers like Courageous and vivaldi construct their very own options on chromium code when growing their browser and haven’t been independently audited (if in any respect) as a lot as Firefox, can be my guess.

> Courageous is normally patched inside 24 hours after the fixes land in Chromium, which is completely acceptable.

Lol at normally. Most likely weeks earlier than Courageous is patched and chromium codebase is consistently getting patched so for a time between these patches courageous may be very insecure lol.

> They’re separate.

Nope. With out good safety, privateness shouldn’t be anticipated. Your argument is on the noob stage.
Working techniques like Qubes mix state-of-the-art safety and privateness as does fedora.

If privateness and safety had been seperate issues then there can be no must have a firewall if working privateness centered purposes like a firefox fork like librewolf.

Safety enhances privateness you absolute noob lol.

> You don’t have any sense of coherent and proper terminology,

In line with a noob such as you, i take that as a praise. Thanks.

> Safe means resistant towards malware, and has nothing to do with the privateness coverage.

Oh look one other noob stage argument. Folks calling win 10 or 11 spyware and adware is definitely a meme, you do know that proper? You suppose home windows defender is safe if M$ can see every little thing within the OS and possibly get a whole lot of knowledge from edge too? How is that safety if M$ Can get a lot telemetry knowledge simply?

Safety and privateness are seperate? solely a noob would say that.

> This argument is irrelevant to me as a result of I take advantage of Courageous, which is open supply. However open supply just isn’t the one strategy to confirm whether or not a product establishes connections, it’s also possible to take a look at the connections closed supply software program establishes by way of instruments like WireShark. You didn’t know that, am I proper? However you then name me a noob, higher clear up at your individual home.

You appear to make use of Courageous with closed supply crap like home windows while not turning off JS since you say it’s annoying. Your safety can be laughable in any linux and privateness dialogue boards. Utilizing Courageous on closed supply crap like home windows is definitely hilarious if you happen to count on privateness. Home windows is closed supply. Lol.

> it’s also possible to take a look at the connections closed supply software program establishes by way of instruments like WireShark.

Lol at wireshark? Am i meant to be impressed? LMAO. That also doesn’t cease closed supply crap like home windows gathering your
actual IP or different such data that determine to gather inside home windows. As i mentioned you’re a noob. lmao at you utilizing wireshark although considering it truly stops large tech working techniques like M$ gathering telemetrey IP adresses, {hardware} ID and many others.

> What it was “designed for” is irrelevant. In fact Google develops Chromium primarily for Chrome

See also  Your put in browser extension could also be used to fingerprint you

What it’s designed for is related in any dialogue. Google drives the chromium challenge and your loved one browser of selection Courageous waits for google for updates, safety patches and many others. Humorous the way you say Firefox depends on google, however in actuality chromium clones depend on them for fixes. Lol.

The quantity of promotion chromium clones will get is absurd. Most individuals that use Courageous or vivaldi are presumably customers that detest chrome or edge. Too lazy to configure Firefox lol.

> Not each a part of the Chromium supply code “violates” your privateness,

It’s a safety threat as a result of there may be approach an excessive amount of code and it’s approach too fashionable, it’s bloated and google retains including in crap to it.

You see no drawback in utilizing google made code like chromium primarily based browsers and also you say you don’t even flip off JS. Javascript turned on is a safety threat in browsers.

> 3% market share,

Oh nice, i can relaxation assured that through the use of not so fashionable browsers like Firefox that they’re safer not like fashionable chrome and edge the safety nightmare browsers getting continually patched.

> As a result of there may be the unsuitable impression that Firefox can enhance your privateness and fights for a free net

So you’re saying that Firefox has no privateness? Suggesting that chrome has extra privateness and Firefox cannot get wonderful privateness? Once more you’re a noob and far of your posts are those which can be misinformation. IN each GHacks FF article it’s a must to actually reply to FF customers attempting to persuade them of your senseless nonsense, however you don’t persuade anybody with technical data about what makes a superb browser. You might be only a noob.

> Arduous-limiting content material processes to eight implies that it isn’t website isolation since a number of web sites can nonetheless share the identical content material processes. That is the design of amateurs and is not any the identical as the complete website isolation Chromium has carried out for years now. It appears that you’re * [Editor: removed, stay polite, please] right here as a result of you aren’t conscious of the particular Firefox code.

Firefox has full website isolation. The design of amateurs? Not full website isolation like chromium has?

What you are attempting to say is that you don’t suppose FF has nearly as good website isolation as chromium primarily based browsers? Thats high-quality, however what’s silly is that you’re attempting to say that FF doesn’t have any full isolation in any respect, which may be very deceptive factor to say.

Firefox truly does have website isolation safety structure. You’re the one who is aware of nothing about FF Code and anybody with a mind that really researched the information round FF new website isolation safety structure FISSION already know that FF has full website isolation that’s already ok when in comparison with chromium code.

With Website Isolation, Firefox hundreds every website in its personal course of, thereby isolating their reminiscence from one another, and depends on safety ensures of the working system. It’s ok, FF Has good safety structure already with FISSION. That course of separation of content material from completely different websites offers the reminiscence protections required to permit for a safe searching expertise.

Utilizing Firefox on Linux is far more safe than utilizing chromium clones or chrome and edge on home windows and many others. You truly promoted M$ over LInux in earlier discussions i had with you which ones solely reveals your noob stage arguments to be silly.

Btw, JAVASCRIPT off is nice safety already, JAVASCRIPT on in a chromium primarily based browser just isn’t good safety contemplating how bloated chromium code is and the best way it interacts with closed supply crap like home windows, chrome and edge on home windows is a safety nightmare and possibly chromium clones too, simply take a look at the fixed information articles about all the safety flaws in them.

Different commenters right here have pointed that out JS is a safety nightmare in chromium primarily based browsers, you truly promote JS To be on. You don’t give good safety recommendation.

> The advertising time period for website isolation, which is (as mentioned) incomplete.

It’s already ok and is consistently bettering, one thing your ignorant thoughts fails to know.

> And you don’t have any thought in regards to the precise Firefox code.

For somebody that claims FF Has no website isolation safety structure? Go look within the mirror pal.

> . Censorship of internet sites on the browser stage is feasible no drawback, and so is reporting web sites customers have visited again to the mothership.

FF is an open supply browser that may be custom-made and has many forks, good strive in fearmongering you noob.

> I by no means mentioned that they’ve the identical attain is Google

You suggest that they’ve the ability of google to censor youtube and many others. Your views are very delusional.

See also  Microsoft Edge's Enhanced Safety Mode defined

> No, based on precise code comparisons. Firefox lacks a number of key exploit mitigations.

Lol, says the one utilizing chromium primarily based cones that must depend on weeks for google to repair SEVERE safety issues of which FF will get nowhere close to the issues.

You suppose studying mad aidans silly weblog and pruning his textual content on the lookout for an argument towards FF makes you smarter? It doesn’t! It truly makes you much less clever.

> So then the entire Firefox clown parade downvotes me, so what? Does this magically make your misinformation, lies, and unsuitable terminology right? No,

The one spreading misinformation is you. You say FF has no website isolation, it does have good safety structure, examine fission. You might be only a blatant hater of FF spreading many mistruths about it time and time once more. You continually search for an angle to hate on Firefox. Firefox does have fission, you sound hateful that they do.

So FF customers are only a clown parade based on you? Okay, i can see why you may have an inferiority complicated in the direction of people who use higher browsers than you. How dare they really select one thing safer and customizable than chrome, edge or chromium clones and level out that what you say about Firefox may be very deceptive.

> Doubt it.

You’d seemingly get banned from any Linux privateness group for selling M$ over Linux and closed supply software program like chrome over Firefox. Lol.

> Why ought to I cease utilizing e.g. Courageous or GrapheneOS once they ship no knowledge to Google. As a result of Google additionally wrote different components of the code that don’t have anything to do with my privateness? Sorry, however that’s no purpose to cease utilizing something.

Use what you need, i don’t care. I’m solely mentioning that Courageous and GrapheneOS depend on google for issues like safety updates in Braves instance and google pixel telephones in GrapheneOS Instance and many others.

Something that doesn’t must depend on google can solely be a superb factor in the long term.

> I mentioned that meticulously sustaining one’s whitelist of what to permit for each web site one visits is impractical for most individuals,

You mentioned that turning off JS was annoying in earlier discussions i had with you, which suggests that you don’t prefer it turned off. You additionally don’t want whitelists for turning off JS when it may be turned on or off with a toggle.

You soundlike somebody who by no means turns off JS which makes you appear to be a complete noob from a safety and privateness perspective.

> Most fingerprinting defenses, together with these of the Tor Browser Bundle, are written with the belief in thoughts that JavaScript is turned on,

Whole BS, tor browser has a in constructed toggle to particularly flip off JS reminding individuals that it’s the most secure choice.

> Factually unsuitable. Any experiment with JS turned off on all web sites can and can show me proper right here.

Privateness centered web sites permit JS to be turned off while offering a superb searching expertise. However you recognize nothing about safety and privateness together with your noob stage arguments and hatred of FOSS Browsers like Firefox.

> No matter they do in Chrome is irrelevant to me, Chrome and Chromium usually are not the identical factor by way of what will be patched out.

Chrome is a safety nightmare, chromium is the bottom for chrome. It stands to purpose that chrome getting so many safety patches proves that chromium is bloated and really insecure. Chrome and chromium are related within the sense of safety patches, bugs and fixes and many others. Google course for the net.

Google having a hand within the FOSS group is an absolute joke.

> I by no means promote their knowledge assortment

Say that Firefox is a greater browser than chrome. Say that Firefox gives higher safety and privateness? Will you say that? Probably not, you’ll skip round it and make excuses for google chrome lol, like you may have executed beforehand.

> They’re higher engineered than Mozilla’s merchandise

There you go. A google promoter.

> I don’t want Mozilla. Switching to Mozilla merchandise would decrease each safety and privateness for me.

Properly you’re entitled to your opinion.

Courageous seemingly won’t be patched for weeks. FF is approach sooner getting up to date. LMAO.

> If uBlock Origin can block connections, so can Mozilla because the browser runs with larger privileges.

You could have been wishing for mozilla to censor customers since you are literally so delusional to imagine that they might make FF a censorship browser. You sound actually dumb together with your persistence in pushing that argument. The deplatform fox is outdated information an outdated meme.

You might be outdated Iron Coronary heart lol.

> Censor the net for customers of their browser, sure.

Firefox an open supply browser being a censorship browser? Utterly delusional!

See also  Freeze Dried Tabs enhance Chrome's startup by 20% on Android

> No, Google makes cash with knowledge assortment

Google additionally makes cash with individuals shopping for google pixel telephones. GrapheneOS depends loads on a google product like pixel telephones to capable of set up GrapheneOS. Google beneficial properties energy by extra individuals utilizing chromium primarily based browsers.

> Sure, if it’s higher than Google’s engineering. In any other case I’ve no purpose to change.

However nothing might ever be higher than google engineering now might it? To query google is to query god itself? Lol.

> How about Mozilla truly fixing their shit? Would that be an choice?

Mozilla doesn’t want to repair Firefox all that always as a result of it appears to be that FF is safer than any chromium primarily based browser.

> Pay attention, individuals take a look at this OPEN SOURCE code and take away minority code snippets that may very well be dangerous to customers, creating acceptable variations of the code. See Courageous,

Chromium is a safety nightmare. An excessive amount of code to take care of and clear for small groups like Courageous.

Damaged tor home windows? Thats braves historical past. Weeks or days to get up to date being depending on google chromium challenge? Thats courageous.

No thanks.

> Chromium truly makes use of much less RAM and CPU than Firefox,

Chromium browsers run like crap on Linux in comparison with Firefox.

> Mozilla has analyzed the YouTube algorithm and discovered that it truly recommends stuff primarily based in your pursuits, so in case you are into conspiracy stuff,

Mozilla’s RegretsReporter browser extensions for Firefox and Chrome? Lol. An extension? You do notice that individuals can take away extensions in firefox browser? Lol.

Extra fearmongering BS.

> why do you suppose that I must assist an organization which believes that Google just isn’t censoring sufficient but? That is no different, that is nuts!

Lol. Mozilla cannot censor something like youtube can. Firefox is only a browser that gives a special engine to the google monopoly, a browser that may be forked like Librewolf.

Ask your self this? Whats worse Google or Mozilla?

> 3 % market share is relatively irrelevant, sure.

If it was, you wouldn’t be typing partitions of textual content in desperation to hate on Firefox customers.

Replying to you is definitely enjoyable, since you are considerably delusional. lol.

> Firefox customers round right here, no disrespect meant clearly, normally promote faulty ideas like “Let’s create a reasonably distinctive browser setup by way of person.js that may defo make me much less fingerprintable than earlier than!

No disrespect? LOL. Actually? You hate and hate on FF Customers pal.

Once more, JS off fails to be a factor in your silly argument. JS off is a safety and privateness enchancment. It may be presumed that Websites cannot fingerprint all that a lot with JS off in a browser. It may also be presumed that Hardened FF customers are additionally not all that distinctive as firefox hardening guides are extremely fashionable in privateness communities and even on mainstream websites like ghacks.

> “Firefox has website isolation and a sandbox now as a result of Mozilla mentioned so, even so it doesn’t.

Not simply Mozilla, however precise those that have knowledgeable tech background reporting on many tech websites that FF does certainly have website isolation safety structure. Your noob views on what website isolation is, will be thought of as IRRELEVANT as you lack data.

> The second Firefox customers, particularly round right here, make me look silly compared to them, is the second you may formally name me Klaus Schwab in mockery

Why would they name you that? You might be simply Iron Coronary heart the Firefox hater who is aware of actually nothing about privateness and safety as regards browsers and working techniques.

* [Editor: removed, stay polite, please]

> satisfying the necessities for the time period “propaganda”

You sound like a communist.

> I simply say that Google’s engineering is total years forward of Mozilla’s, which is true.

Fixed extreme safety patches? Bugs, bloat?

> Some open supply forks of Chromium like Courageous are. Chrome just isn’t.

Courageous won’t ever be higher than Firefox. Their firm just isn’t large enough to be an alternative choice to google.

And sure Firefox is best than chrome, you lastly realized that? lol.

> Chrome is a closed supply fork of Chromium. Courageous is an open supply fork of Chromium. I take advantage of Courageous. Case closed… Your misinformation is getting outdated.

However Courageous is sluggish to get safety patches and in addition makes use of chromium codebase lol which is a adverse. There’s a selection, use old-fashioned forks like courageous or librewolf or use updated safe browsers which can be FOSS like Firefox?

The higher selection is clearly Firefox as soon as configured correctly and a few settings turned off and utilizing good extensions.

No alternate options to Firefox, that’s the reason it will get promoted typically by the privateness communities, you need FF to don’t have any market share solely reveals you favor google influenced know-how like chromium and many others.