Firefox to clamp down on fake news

It's not the job of a web browser to judge and restrict what information you look at or read. A browser is a tool, no different than a hammer.

I wouldn't use a hammer that decided for itself which nails it was going to hit.

Now now user, that microchip says this nail you're trying to hammer has been made out of steel from a forgery managed by a CEO that recently made very anti-semitic statements while having dinner with his family. For your own security, we are preventing you to hammer this nail and strongly advise you to alert your nearest (((community manager))) for emotional support from the pain you've experienced. After all, no one wants to support anti-semitic thoughts, right? Be a good goy.

Well which is it then? I'm using Opera right now but ppl say that's even worse than Firefox.

Was just considering trying out some alternative browsers, thanks Soros!

How about you do like your ancestors did thousands of years ago and, you know, experiencing both firsthand for a while and actually weighting in yourself the pros and cons before ultimately uninstalling the one that didn't serve you?

Make your own mind up user. While I applaud the former CEO for stepping out w/ Brave, I'm frankly uncomfortable with his plans for incorporating micropayment tech straight in his browser. ATP PM still very much has a hacker community mindset around it, and Moon Child is apparently serious about keeping it patched.

Been on Firefox since 2005.
I tried Brave today but it boots up in about 10 seconds even with history cleared.
Anyone found a way to speed it up?

Just installed Waterfox, fastest way to switch if you want to keep everything as if you're still using Firefox. That was very convenient.

Waterfox is simply a wrap around FF user.

pick one

lol globalists

How out of touch is Mozilla? People want a browser that can compete with the speed of Chromium. That is all.

...

how about I pick both, you massive fucking faggot
github.com/Eloston/ungoogled-chromium

Is there any public outcry over this? I literally haven't met one person who has ever mentioned being sick of not being able to tell if a story is fake or not online. This seems like a classic problem/reaction/solution set up to me.

Palemoon sucks.

- t. Palemoon user

Chromium is okay but it's jewgled.

Brave sucks - ads.

Opera - never used it, no fucking idea whether it's shit or not.

Plus ma0r alts. Who knows?

VPN inside VM running amnesiac liveusb or bust, fggts

Only true solution.

So what?

I'm going to disable updates for now and keep using firefox until there's a clear better option.

Palemoon works totally fine and it's memory footprint is half the size of faggotfox'. Use it together with umatrix and ublock and you're fine.

t. palemoon user

There probably is in big urban metropolises where everyone is a professional fartsniffer, their tax dollars are responsible for approximately 1 square-inch of land, and wrongthink results in misdemeanor criminal prosecution.

YouTube doesn't seem to be working in Pale Moon. Tough that'll probably be a bonus.

PM has shit support for old FF plugins, and doesn't seem to handle HTML5 well.

Youtube works fine for me.

...

I use palemoon but unliek j0o I'm not going to shill for it. I'll be honest, it's basically old Firefox. Which is fine for stability but it doesn't render some codecs properly, sucks memory like FF used to do, and is slow AF like FF used to be.

Has anyone ever found a legitimate privacy problem with safari? I know its pleb-tier but It Just Works.

Well, (1), that means all you are doing is putting a different set of makeup on the same coalburning whore. They are one and the same product underneath.

one step forward, three steps backs, trip on your untied shoelace and split your head on the concrete.

Thanks for the link. I will be dropping FF soon it looks like.

Fastest browser in existence and the built-in security is very strong. I see no reason not to use it. Apple was fucking retarded for stopping Safari for Windows development at version 5; it still outsped Chrome and Firefox for at least another year.

Just reinstalled Netscape Navigator.

I hate /g/ so I refuse to ask them, but what's some alternatives for a video downloader and a noscript?
Umatrix looks a bit past my knowledge level.

Brave is also pretty good. It has ad-blocking built in, and it is lead by the guy who got (((resigned))) from Mozilla for donating to a conservative political campaign, Brendan Eich. He's also the creator of JavaScript.

Umatrix just has a slight learning curve. Just mess with it, and if you fuck something up you can just reinstall it, worst case

youtube-dl. It's better than any browser-based option out there.

It's written in python so it'll work on windows/linux/mac. It works on just about any website you'll encounter (not just youtube, like the name might suggest). It gives you options for selecting the format, even mixing and matching audio formats. You can use it to download entire playlists or channels from youtube.

rg3.github.io/youtube-dl/

If you have mpv, it will automatically try to download and play the video using youtube-dl

mpv link_to_youtube_vid

>even mixing and matching audio and video formats

For example I hope code tags work on Holla Forums…
youtube-dl -F https'':''//www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIQ3FPOD5xE
Will list available formats:
139 m4a audio only DASH audio 50k , m4a_dash container, mp4a.40.5@ 48k (22050Hz), 10.44MiB249 webm audio only DASH audio 52k , opus @ 50k, 11.04MiB250 webm audio only DASH audio 82k , opus @ 70k, 14.43MiB171 webm audio only DASH audio 122k , [email protected]/* */, 19.83MiB140 m4a audio only DASH audio 130k , m4a_dash container, [email protected]/* */ (44100Hz), 27.78MiB251 webm audio only DASH audio 145k , opus @160k, 25.59MiB278 webm 256x144 144p 74k , webm container, vp9, 24fps, video only, 11.19MiB160 mp4 256x144 DASH video 116k , avc1.4d400c, 12fps, video only, 23.59MiB242 webm 426x240 240p 151k , vp9, 24fps, video only, 11.59MiB134 mp4 640x360 DASH video 224k , avc1.4d401e, 24fps, video only, 36.02MiB133 mp4 426x240 DASH video 257k , avc1.4d4015, 24fps, video only, 52.91MiB243 webm 640x360 360p 262k , vp9, 24fps, video only, 21.07MiB244 webm 854x480 480p 362k , vp9, 24fps, video only, 32.62MiB135 mp4 854x480 DASH video 421k , avc1.4d401e, 24fps, video only, 73.35MiB247 webm 1280x720 720p 604k , vp9, 24fps, video only, 77.38MiB136 mp4 1280x720 DASH video 874k , avc1.4d401f, 24fps, video only, 160.17MiB17 3gp 176x144 small , mp4v.20.3, mp4a.40.2@ 24k36 3gp 320x180 small , mp4v.20.3, mp4a.40.243 webm 640x360 medium , vp8.0, [email protected]/* */18 mp4 640x360 medium , avc1.42001E, mp4a.40.2@ 96k22 mp4 1280x720 hd720 , avc1.64001F, [email protected]/* */ (best)

You can then choose on of those formats like this:
youtube-dl -f 43 https'':''//www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIQ3FPOD5xE

Or combine an audio and video format like this:
youtube-dl -f 244+250 https'':''//www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIQ3FPOD5xE

When downloading from youtube, you can often use this technique to make webm's small enough to post on 8ch without needing to transcode anything.

Okay well those links got fucked by the wordfilter. Obviously you just give it the URL without any of that colon fuckery. You get the idea.

Command line stuff can seem intimidating, but don't let that dissuade you. It's actually really simple, just use it a few times and you'll definitely get the hang of it. Youtube has a ton of really powerful features if you dig into the manual, the usefulness of the tool will grow as your skill and comfort with it improves.

I second this. It's already the best browser on mobile. It's still in beta on desktop and it's not finished yet, still way too many hangups and glitches. I hope they finish it soon. Firefox is bloated and a hog, and now it wants to bug chase.

Why do I have the impression that rather than increasing visibility of certain pieces of information (whatever those would be according to Mozilla; making certain data visible is never the worst thing that can be done), this means actively penalizing and censoring certain sites and individuals?

I am a bit torn what to do now.

Regardless of Tor's safety, assuming assuming that it is safe, I wonder just how much of Firefox's trashy initiatives will leak to Tor Browser. Ideally, it would remain purified and neutral. Though then, there is a fair number of trashy token women on Tor's core contributors page; this could mean that it has been more or less ideologically compromised. Though then, perhaps not, and perhaps those women are, indeed, just token "promotion" and "advocation" women which have no real say in the software's development.

I can't just use Tor with another browser because I cannot trust myself not to leave browser engine footprints through masking it insufficiently.

This also works in VLC, if you use File->Open Network… This is how I watch youtube videos at work. I think it might use youtube-dl behind the scenes, but I'm not sure.

Are the makers of Firefox making money off you when you use Waterfox?

THIS IS NOT A BRAG-WORTHY FEATURE

Imagine: you actually made a browser that doesn't suck.
I'm sick of these tech "foundations" that get money from people who like their products, and then they turn around and spend it on anything but the product. Either it's pie-in-the-sky tech ideas, generic shitlib charities that have zero impact ("let's teach African children to program!"), or bullshit like this where they try to solve problems that have nothing to do with their products.

And until Mozilla drops this anti-fake news software into their browser, I'll keep using their garbage because it's either Firefox or a (((Google))) browser, which is even worse in every respect. (Bad on privacy, bad on "social outreach" bullshit, ) Woe betide the idiot who switches to a competitor that uses the Blink engine and thinks they escaped Google, or uses a proprietary browser instead.

I've never looked into Waterfox before just a minute ago, but it seems they claim to have removed code from firefox. They're not merely wrapping it:
>Features:
>Disabled Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)
>Disabled Web Runtime (deprecated as of 2015)
>Removed Pocket
>Removed Telemetry
>Removed data collection
>Removed startup profiling
>Allow running of all 64-Bit NPAPI plugins Literally why???
>Removal of Sponsored Tiles on New Tab Page
>Addition of Duplicate Tab option Neat?

Source: waterfoxproject.org/#develop

As far as I can tell, there’s like two big branches in browsers: those using Chromium, and those based on Firefox. There might be a handful of original browsers, but I don’t think they are mature enough to be reliable (on the other hand, if they are not being tested, there’s no way they’ll ever improve).
Chrome - Google, avoid at all costs.
Edge - Microsoft’s re-branded Internet Explorer.
Firefox – SJW-infested developers, uses Google search for its plugin directory.
Pale Moon, IceCat, Swiftfox, Waterfox – All derivative of Firefox.
Comodo Dragon (fucked up html over SSL security recently), SRWare Iron, Torch, Opera (since version 10 or so) and Vivaldi – Derivative of Chromium
UC Browser - looks shady as fuck.
Avant – no idea what it does… and they’ve got a weird logo that’s either Star Trek or Italian dish-related depending on how much you squint your eyes.
Brave - seems to support Chrome pluggins but isn’t based on Chromium?
Midori – don’t have much info on it.

It would be good now to test as many of them as possible (dig into who’s developing what, how much tracking is taking place, how reliable they are) so “approved” or “safe” alternatives are available instead of starting a flame-war and one-liner replies as soon as unsuspecting user posts the name of a pozed browser.

He's got technical chops, is the point.

And if you know the history of Javascript and netscape, you'd know that Javascripts abortion-like qualities are not his fault. He originally wrote an in-browser scheme-dialect. Netscape management told him that nobody likes lisp but Java was the new hotness and they wanted to sleeze off that brand name. So they made him turn the syntax into an bastard child between Java/C and scheme. No joke, that's why it's called Javascript. Netscape management fucked it up, not Brendan.

And how they going achieve this?
Does the browser window close automatically if fakenews are detected?
Or is this the new money laundering buisnessmodel, collect a lot of little donations and push it to "(((charity)))"
MITI but what they actually meant was probably MITM.

Is Cyberfox safe or was it shitlisted? I never see anyone mention it.

An actual actual solution would be to de-JavaScript, de-cookie, and de-visualize the web, so that simple, amateur browsers are as usable as the big ones (in the sense of being able to support any website). In addition to obvious benefits in cost, speed, and accessibility, it would also increase security, because it would be easier for a nonspecialist user to audit very basic / text browsers for malicious features. And if someone needed JavaScript and style eyecandy, they could still use a big browser for games or whatever else that doesn't demand privacy.

Hey guys, anyone knows or uses Midori? It's open source.

Also, opinions on Epic?

> archive.fo/LIccJ

This is why there is no decent political leaders - any principled and popular person is a target for immediate hit by (((them))).

They put their fucking tentacles everywhere.

If I had to guess, they probably mean to signal fake news in the URL bar, like they do with https.

Or maybe even more intrusively like the "certs are expired/invalid" behavior.

Wikipedia says:
> Brave is a free and open-source[2][3][4] web browser based on the Chromium web browser and its Blink engine

You'd better to start using Brave if you want to support based anti-degeneracy devs. Shitty forks won't do any harm to jewgle or sjwfox.

No, if you browse the "Get Add-ons" section, you can't use your privacy add-ons to block the Google Analytics on their website.

It is based on Chromium. It just hides it under its (ugly) UI.

Midori uses WebkitGTK, the Apple-developed FOSS engine behind Safari, but it is so lacking in features that it's not good enough for a daily driver. That's true of other such minimal, GNU/Linux-exclusive browsers that use Webkit. (I do like to play around with qutebrowser, though.)

One possible way to do this: Brutal enforcement of ADA accessibility rules. Every commercial website must facilitate the visually impaired. These accessibility features could be taken advantage of by people who aren't blind but want to use unusual browsers with minimalist UIs.

Sue the everloving fuck out of any American commercial website that doesn't bend over backwards to make their website accessible to the disabled. Companies would be relatively paralyzed to publicly oppose this, because the disabled are too high on the progressive stack.

What is the point of running a VM? To not let non-anonymous services (like Google Drive) talk over the VPN?

Limits the harm your webbrowser can do if it decides to go on a rampage. Like scanning your HD for the NSA or something like that.

She's going to hurt her boob.

Very interesting idea to use progressive mindset to demand accessible websites. A problem I see with this that JavaScript, the carrier of most what's wrong with the web today, does not really prevent usability. It slows your browser down and it hurts privacy, but its use does not prohibit you from accessing sites' content. Therefore the strategy you describe could only work if we forced siteowners to comply to a set of standards which includes both visually, navigationally friendly design AND support of user agents who don't support scripting and cookies. An all-or-nothing approach.

Somehow forgot to state the biggest benefit of cookieless, JS-less web: no tracking, both directly (via cookies) and indirectly (via UI footprint exposed through various JS API-s).

fingerprint*

Or just bring back the motherfucking Gopher protocol. You can show text, dl/ul files and give text input to the server - people are even implementing chans with this functionality.

They have accessibility standards for awful web 2.0 pages, it's called ARIA.

Javascript generated website features like menus and whatnot are absolute nightmares for accessibility. Properly used/abused, accessibility laws might force commercial websites to give functioning fallbacks to all javascript needed to render their website.

That would really be for the best, but I don't think we can revive gopher as gopher. Forcing the industry to re-invent gopher under a new name might work though.

The pic you gave looks perfectly fine to me, usability-wise. Do you know if Gopher supports arbitrary markup, the way XML namespaces allow mixing HTML and other XML languages in XHTML? So that user agents don't have to parse raw text in order to extract data from it (think marking up the "CELEBRATING…" part of your pic as a header instead of having to parse rows of asterisks)?

Use Brave

Maybe we can make BBSes hip again, especially with a lot of "geeks" loving the retro aesthetics. Solve the problem of showing 80x25 on a smartphone screen while allowing user to control it, and we're set.

A lot of Brave shilling going on. Looks like they've set up bounties for (((social promotion)) in exchange for BATs.

I've heard of it but not really looked into it. From what I understand, it sucks. I think there is still a lot of room for using lawsuits to force tech companies into greater compliance.

From what I can say having worked in the industry (not on webpages, but on handheld devices), companies don't give a shit about accessibility. They'll assign maybe one developer part-time on a team to make sure it technically works, but don't give a single shit about if it works well. It's kind of a pet-peeve for me since I like using things like TTS even though my vision is perfect.

Kike ADA compliance lawyers could actually do some good for once if they stopped harassing mom and pop shops in small towns over ramp angles, and started taking on tech titans.

That's certainly an idea worth investigating.

Looks like it doesn't support markup, but if we want to "reinvent" it, why not add it? It's like the "hypertext vector Fido", but with Gopher.

That would be great. Then all kinds of lightweight, transparent browsers could perhaps enjoy a deserved comeback. There is very very little that fancy visual real-time interfaces can offer that cannot, with a bit of effort from the site owners, be offered to the user using good old s, s and s.

I like this unintentional orwellism.

I work on web apps, and we never talk/think about accessibility at all.

Here a Winn Dixie website was found to violate the ADA: archive.is/1ht0E

There's RIPscrip which can be used for touch controls, but most existing BBS packages with easy setup (notably Mystic) would require a lot of modification.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_Imaging_Protocol

>Then all kinds of lightweight, transparent browsers could perhaps enjoy a deserved comeback. There is very very little that fancy visual real-time interfaces can offer that cannot, with a bit of effort from the site owners, be offered to the user using good old s, s and s.
Precisely. And all we need to do is get jewish ADA compliance lawyers to see the profit motive in doing our dirty work for us.

They still market themselves as completely open source while they now have shit like pocket coded in which isn't. These faggots should get challenged in court. Also I'm sure they're funneling donation money into political activity thats unrelated.

Also, have there been any initiatives for a standardized interface among browser vendors to unify browsers' fingerprints? Some kind of "same button" that would cause each browser, regardless of its engine, to report the same resolution, capacities, UA string, etc. Perhaps also to disable various kinds of optimization or deferred execution of subrequests, so that it would not even be possible to try to infer the browser engine through some minuscule timing patterns (for instance, engine A tends to download images first and plugins later than engine B).

I understand that corporate opposition to this would be enormous, but benefits are so big, perhaps it's worth a try?

checked
The only reason I was excited for it at all was I thought they were starting from scratch and there could be a brand new browser on the market when they were done. It's a buggy mess while already being based on something else? What the hell?! Opera switched to being based on that without anything like that happening.

Or, alternatively, an extremely simple, extremely open, extremely readable cross-platform proxy server which would do nothing but filter and unify all outgoing requests; stripping the above private data, but also fixing such things as possible differences in request header capitalization and formatting. Depends on which would have better prospects of adoption.

Its openness would be so vital to its success that perhaps it should not be distributed as a binary at all, but solely as code.

Do you think such a thing could be adopted by, for instance, GNU/Linux distros?

So, pretty much a FOSS version of Opera Mini's server side. Who's raiding their HQ?

(Completely forgot about encryption. Well, then perhaps it could have the elevated privilege to inject itself before the browser makes an encrypted request. I don't know, just shooting ideas.)

Sorry, I misspoke. I meant a server running locally. It would intercept your requests, no matter from which browser, and unify them before they leave your machine.

An added benefit of that over making it a browser addon (or maybe make it both, sharing codebase?) would be support of older browsers in the first couple of years.

(checked)
That's why it should be FOSS - everyone can run a local instance that will unify the requests and strip the bullshit from the response. Opera's server makes possible for me to surf the web with a good degree of usability on a slider made in 2007. A network of such proxies supported by enthusiasts would be very useful (nobody's preventing you from running a private instance, though).

I chuckled.

It shouldn't do that. First, I believe that such a program should be kept so simple that "you can read the code yourself and see that it doesn't do anything malicious" should no longer be just a real, but impractical possibility, but something people should be actually encouraged to do; not in sense of perfect comprehension of what the code does, of course, but in the sense that they can devote (hopefully) half an hour to scroll through it and see that it's mostly, say, system calls and text operations, and it contains no remote calls. It should be particularly well commented for that end as well.

And second, do one thing and do it well. It should do what it says on the tin: unify outgoing requests. Receiving crap such as ads or scripts is not dangerous in the sense that you're supposed to disable cookies and JavaScript in your browser in the first place. And when it comes to ensuring that your browser actually did disable those and is not surreptitiously transmitting JS or cookies behind your back anyway, well, the whole point of this fingerprint-erasing software is that it is supposed to help independent makers of small, freely-licenced browsers enter the market and compete with big, untrustworthy proprietary browsers. It's supposed to increase the use of independent browsers by removing the "yea this browser is nice but it's so niche that if I use it, I will be extremely identifiable among the crowd" issue.

We should not make it fix more than the core problem lest it is seen as yet another shitty 2000s' "online security suite".

I'm skeptical. I think it should be promoted as "trust yourself and yourself only", which implies solely local execution.

Appreciate your input though.

If Trump had balls the size of Eich's, that fucking child rapist would be in the White House again. Hopefully the upcoming generation will learn from the common failures of our own.

The problem isn't for our own personal use, it's for our potential to reach out to normies, to reach out to people with the truth.

It's a war of information and finally it seems like we have come to this point where they have to actively and openly fight us to stifle us.

>>/whereeverthehellyoucamefrom/

(Note, there arguably aren't very many ways to leak your identity after you disable JS and cookies, but such an app could take care of, for instance, bugs; though there might be a feature for setting user agent, a bug might truncate it in certain circumstances, making it characteristic. Things like that would be taken care of automatically.)

(And besides, it would take care of having to monitor browser popularity charts to know which one to imitate to blend in best; the UA would be changed to "Fuck/0x0.0xFF (unknown; unknown; unknown)" for everyone, for ever. Sorry for rant.)

pleb

youtube.com/watch?v=omlQHWrgmd4

>Mozilla's Chief Innovation Officer Katharina Borchert

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katharina_Borchert

=Well that's mighty convenient, aint it?=

...

>She has been a member of Amnesty International for 20 years, and is involved in initiatives to get more women into boardrooms and executive positions in the media industry.

Though then, this is nonnews.

firefox is toast

F

Thanks user, that sounds worth looking into.
I just got my firefox setup in a nice way too, what a pain in the ass
hopefully waterfox is good and easy to switch to

No, it's pretty excellent. You're compromising privacy if you enable icloud for Safari, but you don't need to enable that. The only true negative is that they've been slow in the past to patch exploits. That said, use common sense and don't run flash or java.

Translation: Not a fucking clue.

Set up new Crypto, combined with ad stripping proxies. Always dreamt of something like this.
I can just imagine, trying get my idea across:
If it is possible to generate a incentive to run or deploy polnet-proxys, with

-entry node deducts amount from client wallet
-exit node owner recieves the cryptobux

-to get into polnet, one must buy polbux or deploy proxies and generate polbux himself. Those generated polbux, use it or sell it.

then, why not setup a few exit node on a vps, recieve crypto-polbux and buy proxies with it, maybe even anonymity.
(its new, so not forbidden or problematic like tor)
enrcypt proxy end to end traffic with some shit (would mylar work in this case?)
Hope this make's sense somehow.

Yeah, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME_Web is my goto on linux. Helps avoid the mess of firefox and chromium.

Another reason for the VM, is to limit the amount of data external services can correlate about you. If for example you're using a systemwide vpn, then your identity will be betrayed by services like dropbox, iTunes music etc. which connect via the same ip. That allows NSA to de-anonymize users in real time by matching your IP address to your real identity.

Time to use brave.

I laughed, but it'll probably happen.

It's easy to be fast when you support little. Safari's support for modern web technologies is literally worse than Microsoft's at this moment. Coming from the company that drove the death of flash betting on HTML5 as a replacement, they've done little to actually ensure that their HTML5 is good.

Sources:
html5test.com/results/desktop.html
caniuse.com/

HTML5 has been identified and demonstrated as an easily leveraged vulnerability for exfiltration at DEFCON.

tread lightly with that shit.

If you use things like iTunes or Dropbox then correlation such as you describe is the least of your problems.

I honestly wouldn't put it past them. I think a lot of these libshits have adopted a "never again!" mentality after Trump won. When it comes to censoring wrongthing, there are no measures too severe.

Yes, but a lot of normies have "unpopular opinions" so it's important they can share them without fears of reprisal.

Ulight is firefox with more speed and less bullshit

Not possible, you're only friend at this point is Palemoon.

Not true, we have Vivaldi user

I switched to Brave recently and I've got to say, I like a lot of the features of the browser. Incognito mode opens unique tabs instead of new windows like Chrome which makes browsing more convenient, you can mute individual tabs by clicking an audio icon that appears when tabs are playing audio, and you can set Duckduckgo or another search engine as your default instead of Jewgle.

Vivaldi is just a javascript UI layer on top of chromium.

Another thing Safari does is energy efficiency. Chrome is dreadfully taxing on battery life.

ga''te

ga''''te

(dem quads)
No lad, Vivaldi has closed source sections, you do not know what's in there, ever. It's the same as Firefox if you include the EME version where the DRM for certain playback is closed source [GMP cisco] which is a attack vector by state actors which i know first hand. The same as the opportunistic encryption, it allows high level adversaries to use quantum interception techniques to bypass encrypted connections.

Palemoon is the only one left that protects the user and gives the user the freedom to do what they want, aka the hacker mindset.

Can confirm youtube-dl is pretty amazing. I've been using it for about 5 years now, and it's especially usefull in lo-bandwidth situations when you really want the high-def version of a file.

BTW, youtube-dl works on literally hundreds of different sites, not just youtube.com

OK, but when Google announces the complete abandonment of Firefox in the future, and Waterfox suddenly folds, you'll only have yourself to blame. It is completely dependent on the Mothership. PM is a completely independent product.

Mozilla has mastered the art of wasting money and straying off target.

Lack of good plugins means that it's hard to stay as private as firefox. ublock origin was recently released for safari

I literally had this idea one year ago. Thought I'd call it Donar - as an alternative to T(h)or. (Donar is germanic, Thor nordic).
The possible crypto-economics behind this coin are amazing. If the amount generated from providing 1MB and the amount needed to buy 1MB are variable then you can give incentives to provide more bandwith, respectively charge more per 1MB in order to react to high demand.

You probably should implement some proof of work:
entry-node gets packet .-> generate hash from pracket-> encrypts packet-> send it to exit node -> decrypts packet -> generates hash from packet
Both write down the hash for each packet, and after every 1 MB list is compared to proof 1MB was generated.

The main problem is the following: users do not want to use their IP for exit nodes, because you become liable for whatever sick shit comes out of your exit node. On the other hand they make lots of CA$H now so they can afford a lawyer.

Another idea:

A browser plugin with torrent and distributed hash tables to broadcast fashy right wing youtube vids into censorship ridden Europe (and overlay the torrented vid on the actual youtube video page). Then add channel support, so you can browse blocked channels too.

We don't need a new video platform, we just circumvent the old one.

lel, i think you've reached the wrong board user.
>>>/tumblr/ is you're path.

Funny, but no there are many intelligent NatSocs who have not specialized in computer security. They are the people I'm concerned about.

>the project is aimed at bringing together (((interest groups)))

Fair enough then. VPNs and/or TOR + https is about as good as a layman can achieve then. Not using a browser that phones home such as Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox are obvious choices.

Using basic addon protections like Encrypted Web (ie, HTTPSEverywhere), uMatrix and uBlock Origin are also the basics.

Website privacy is basically a fallacy user. All you can really do is make you're shit something other than low-hanging fruit. There is literally nothing you can do to protect yourself from state-level actors on the public networks user, not even TOR or VPNs will work as they have access to the whole network and can do simple traffic analysis as well as sophisticated signals analysis.

Security is a very deep topic, and not one suited to laymen tbqh.

Have a look at this to give you a basic idea why https+TOR is at least a good start.
https: // www.eff.org/pages/tor-and-https

chromium is still botnet, use pale moon

If you have (((safebrowsing))) enabled then every web page you visit is sent to jewgle.

...

some logo oc

This, even if you encrypt everything they can still get a fingerprint of your traffic and observe what comes out of the Tor node its exiting from.

Well, technically the encryption and the simple traffic analysis are basically two separate areas, but yes.

And in fact, as the excellent EFF infographic indicates, the NSA doesn't need to compromise even a single TOR node–either entry, relay, or exit–to follow the path of the traffic as they literally have access to the entire public portion of the networks (and very likely many private ones).

...

I think that was a fed psyop. Shortly after Tor users got fucked over by vulns that carried over from Mozilla. Smells like typical CIAnigger shit.

you -> TOR -> VPN -> www

also consider using tails (bootable linux with tor preinstalled, amnesiac) or whonix (VM Workstation connects to VM tavistockway connects to tor. everything preinstalled, permanent)

tails is good if you want a secure, transportable OS you just need to boot and has anything you may need already preistalled (bitcoin, gimp, office, EXIF Cleaner, etc..) wipes any data when shutdown, thus nothing safed!!

whonix is good if you want an additional layer of security for your home computer, or you want to run a darknet server. It is permant, meaning you can safe data. The additional security is achieved by the fact that only VM tavistockway has your real IP, whereas VM Workstation has your browser, files, programs etc. If somehow the browser leaks the ip then it's not the real one but the one of VM wokrstatin

That's what i mean, they can just correlate traffic patterns, unless you use an actual VPN that's isn't backdoored with noise added like a live stream or something.

Along with the founder of the Devuan project, the simple fact that the TAILS project continued to mindlessly plod forward in spite of the many obvious problems with poettering's systemd causes me some concern.

I would rather recommend the HEADS system for TOR use instead user.

Qubes my dude, has a Tor gateway (whonix) and you can generate amnesiac instances on the fly.

Qubes is GOAT OS

Actually even a VPN isn't a guarantee of traffic privacy as long as you are on the public networks user. The same trick used against the TOR relay network also functions against VPN use.

Basic point; you have no way to hide traffic if you use public networks. All you can reasonably hope to do atp is protect the data itself from compromise.

The fact that Tor devs try and sell the idea of network security via a fucking browser just shows how full of bad ideas they are. Tor browser should be dropped altogether with all efforts put on a non-pozzed distro.

Fair point. Install Gentoo.

Brave is going to have built in tor at some point.

Check'd

Well at least there's still weak wifis to tap into :^)

i havent used firejew in at least 10 years, since they started to become a bloated piece of shit i left them in the dust so this news doesnt really effect me at all. But this is a bigger pushback trying to tighten their control over the normalfags. I'm expecting pages not to load at all or give a big red warning like a virus page being "unsafe" once this kikery drops into the code.

Heh, what are you implying exactly user?

Some things really are just absolute truths

I'm just wondering what alternative would spring into popularity with normalfags, would be nice to see palemoon explode with massive support

No, you just use it to hide from websites the fact that you use tor.

If you really want to go for that extra anonymity then buy an external wifi card, build a 1,5m antenna and then connect to any shoddily secured WiFi's within 2km radius.

Then TOR -> VPN

Can't argue with that.

Likely brave, since everyone who doesnt already have an adblocker installed ie normalfags is fucking tired of ads or complacent after years of it but if you showed them how botnet ads effect their surfing experience they would drop firejew pretty fast.

I mainly use Opera with ublock and umatrix, better than firejew's ad blockers by far but keep Brave around for any other alternative if one goes south into SJW botnet.

trufax is tru.

Sure, there are plenty of subterfuges useful against the lower levels in the chain, like ISPs or websites. I was speaking primarily of state-level actors such as the NSA or other Five Eyes. They literally pwn the routers themselves. They also, ofc, have a potential total lockdown on the intra-country network infrastructures of all types, including TCP/IP ones. They can do 'private' signals analysis or injections at will.

Only on private networks do you even have a fighting change at traffic privacy from this tier.

So how did they gather this data unless they're spying on users?

There's nothing these people can realistically expect to do, it's probably just blatant virtue signalling to keep being funded or get more funding.

Apparently from Rothschild paedophiles, but they do have money I guess so there is that.

...

Built-in VPN, built-in adblocker, gpu acceleration, fancy "pop-out" video player so you can have a video playing in the corner while reading a different tab.

Holla Forums autism blinds you to so many things.

I remember a discussion on how to shield a desktop from ultrasound/low radio freq. It was pretty far fetched, but once you get locked into serious OPSec there's the tendency to push it as far as you can…

Jolly Roger's Security Guide For Beginners:
deepdotweb.com/jolly-rogers-security-guide-for-beginners/

True. Not only Faraday cages but 2 feet thick wraps of cork and fine thermal piping meshes. And this is for bunkers buried deep underground!

Thanks user.

- he didn't join NRA for decades because they were "too moderate".
- thinks we should carpet bomb the entire islamic world because Islam is shit and it's either us or them
- fully redpilled on Soviet subversion: esr.ibiblio.org/?p=260
- frantically hates commies
- supports google manifesto

Armed & Dangerous: esr.ibiblio.org/

Firefox got POZ'd years ago. After (((they))) started to take code from Chrome and use (((Google's databases))).
Anyone who doesn't use a Firefug fork deserves to get fugged

Related
Fuck Opera

see

what parts of Eloston's ungoogled chromium are bunk?

You mean Chrome?

...

Look at the date and understand the context
>FireFox forks
Things like Palemoon and Cyberfox for example

VPN is shit tier free proxy. Have fun w/ that.

...

LYNX MASTER RACE

Lets say you were only using one such service on a systemwide VPN. You aren't the only user on that VPN exitnode, how do they match all traffic that is you into one thing in order to do that?

This is wrong, you are the only one with that ip, at a given time. You cannot have two people on the internet with the same IPs.

To clarify, yes of course there are multiple people on that "exit node", but that node is assigned a pool of IPs, with a unique one given to each person on that node.

LOL SOROS

opensocietyfoundations.org/press-releases/five-major-foundations-announce-groundbreaking-plans-develop-public-interest

Also note pic related.

I like how they didn't have the gall to outright call it 'social justice'.

Fug.

Sure, but I always just figured they were doing some sort of NAT traversal. Like how you can have local IPs, but on the other end.

That's at least not the impression I got from the marketing material, but then I never really looked very hard.

Most VPN services use shared IPs. The same public IP address may be used by two different devices, either at a small time interval (NAT), or by using different source ports (PAT), or both. It complexifies a lot the individual/IP association. This is Network Admin 101. Don't embarrass me, Holla Forums.

This is more along the lines of how I figured it. I'm certain I've seen the same ID as me posting in the same thread before, which would mean both using the same IP.
There is a switch in my VPN for if you want all ports open to you, and the only way that could work is if it did assign you a particular IP while that is active.
So back to my original question, can they always see which port you are on in order to correlate traffic, or does it really get lost in the crowd like the VPN says it does?
Something I've never actually done, so…

The same IP+port may be used by another VPN user the half-second after, so if you use a well-crowded endpoint and change endpoints regularly (something every VPN client software does automatically), you can wish them a fair share of fun to identify your device.

Ok, thanks. That's what I thought.
Given that I'm just some user, I don't see why they would have enough of a reason to actually bother. Even without starting to use a VM or anything else.

Is Palemoon still OK?

Moshezilla

Thanks, I try it. I hate Mozilla since they fired Brendan Eich. I think that was even more scandalous than Google firing Damore.

Firefox is owned by the jew

Not a single browser alone can help prevent your information from being tracked, why do they continue lying to the public blatantly?

Furthermore, why the fuck hasnt the memory leak problem been fixed?

Im using IE11 over any Firefox version 28+ because firefox is fucking terrible and chrome is owned by jewgle, safari suppose to be ran on iOS (i wonder if there was any media manipulation correlating multiculturalism/diversity by having mac users install safari onto windows platforms? Afterall, corruption has been goin on since the dawn of time)

And who is to designate what is "fake" and what isn't?
Sounds like Mozzilla is just helping to push the "official" narrative & indoctrinate its users, to me.

Fuck you, Firefox.
I remember when you used to be cool.

For you guys debating the TCP/IP issue and merits of this or that approach to you're individual IP, etc, remember signals analysis is a thing. This stuff has been going full bore since early WWII, long before the Internet was invented. And when you own both ends of a pipe–no matter how labyrinthine–correlating flow on one end with flow on the other is relatively straightforward for high-speed analysis systems.

Yeah, I'd have to agree with that view user.

This. After being a faithful user for more than a decade, I experienced grief when I had to pull the plug on an old friend a couple years ago. They had drunk the koolaid and it was too late for them. At least unlike Old Yeller who was only frothing at the mouth a bit, Firecucks had plainly become a monster bent on destroying everything good and virtuous. It was time to put them down.

these "tech" companies are out of control
pic related

I hated that too. Disgraceful. Rap being shitty non-music notwithstanding, "what's wrong with defacing buildings if the lettering is 'pretty'?".

Even for routers I roll my own with pfsense, block ads and other CIAniggery before any of it touches my lan

Only if she draws the string to the other side, nigger.

I was referring to the public Internet, not your own private network user.

It's not always NAT. It depends if the VPN is offering port forwarding or not.

Actually ignore this, that can still be done with NAPT.

This fucking kike again. At least normalfags know more about Soros touching everything he turns to commie cancer now so it will be an easier sell to drop firejew.
archived link archive.is/5lyp0#selection-1031.227-1031.296

It reduces the search space, because there are only so many human identities to look through corresponding with that shared ip at a given time. Beyond that, I'm sure the NSA has a whole host of timing attacks they can use, by monitoring traffic flows across multiple routers, assuming of course that they don't just access and dump the NATP tables of the VPN directly.

I'm too invested with Firefox on desktop due to addons and customizations.

But Brave is my primary browser on phone/tablet. Relatively fast and native adblocker.

I came to realize that basically every addon I cared about on FF was either supported on Palemoon, or had a fork or workaround.
addons.palemoon.org/incompatible/

An open Wintel in a computer department store is more secure than anything at home. Video surveillance needs indictment or ongoing police work.
Just to read something it is enough to go into private mode and load it onto a stick. Then use somebody elses PC e.g. at a public library to read it privately. If you're sure there is no worm in it, nobody will flag you for reading it. Otoh, you could just use a open wifi on the hills of the city and use a standard vm.
Anyone reading this is on a list anyway, i don't care anymore.

Opera has built in ssl vpn now, so you can evade link local and ISP snooping.

O hi fhe 1 guy from Montreal using lynx between 12:00 and 12:30. How are you?

Like zerotier or dn42?

...

Everyone knows that Google is anti-white, but that blatantly looks like it was edited in MS Paint.

So what happens if you use addons to continue browsing anonymously using kikeyfox?

Literally everything works fine for me in PM.