All Activity

Perhaps I went too technical there and did not get my point trough. What I try to do is help avoid people from making bad decision for their security or privacy. There are too many shills shilling too many allegedly secure or private services on the internet and unless someone does breakdown for problems with services and claims they may think they are secure to send anything, even data you you normally would not over it when using them. Point you think you are invulnerable is point you are more vulnerable than ever. I want everyone to take any promises of security or privacy with great grain of salt and not put all eggs to one basket.

I missed you guys too. I am happy you both are still here. My life will never be same as it was before but I believe that as long as blood is still pumping on my veins it is worth living and keep fighting forward.

Thanks.

Thanks. I personally disable WU and will also now be disabling these CTL updates. "My computer, my preference."

On Windows Vista and higher there should be no need to manually update those certificates anymore. Like Draker said, the behaviour on these OS since Vista is the same ; Windows checks for Trusted CTL once a week and the Untrusted CTL every day through Windows Update using the automatic daily update mechanism (CTL updater) ! Disabling WU may prevent those certificates from being updated ( I haven't tested it myself so can't confirm) To modify this behaviour (at your own risk) it's possible to change the following registry keys : Enable or disable the Windows AutoUpdate of the trusted CTL: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\AuthRoot] "DisableRootAutoUpdate"=dword:00000000 0 to enable or 1 to disable. This key is not present by default. Without a key present, the default is enabled. Enable or disable the Windows AutoUpdate of the untrusted CTL: [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Policies\Microsoft\SystemCertificates\AuthRoot] "EnableDisallowedCertAutoUpdate"=dword:00000001 1 to enable or 0 to disable. This key is not present by default. Without a key present, the default is enabled.

Intriguing. I'll see if I can find anything this evening. I'd be flagged by IT in three different countries if I so much as downloaded Supermium or Thorium here at work. Irony there is they've never noticed my 360Chrome 1030 but they did "slap my hand" when I tried 2044.

Yes you are right,I will delete the not working test (Brave).

Funny you should say that! The mention of Stylus jogged my memory that I was already doing exactly that on 360Chrome, and have been doing so for well over a year! Strangely though, if I switch off Stylus now the Digital Spy forum site still looks OK, so they've obviously changed something. I've tried installing Stylus on Thorium, and importing the Stylus settings from 360Chrome, but it doesn't work, the font is still wrong. I've attached my Stylus settings file, do you think it's still correct? The site still looks correct in Supermium without Stylus even installed. stylus-2024-04-23.json

Not sure how this test is supposed to work. It always shows the URL you posted, with no extra parameters. This also occurs on a clean profile, with no extensions installed. It's always a blank page with the text: "Look in the URL bar for the presence of a query string parameter."... and just the clean URL.

@feodor2 Can you provide a SSE only release of Mypal 68.14.0b ? Regards

It is a privacy-related feature. In addition to the list of filters you mentioned @UCyborg other filter lists with these features are those of DandelionSprout (The most famous is Actually Legitimate URL Shortener Tool).

Since I created an account on Codeberg, I get these crashes only in single-process mode, They occur absolutely randomly without uploading any file. It is enough to click some links here and there, and the browser crashes immediately without any message. And it never happens with the same link. Very strange!

Thanks. I guess this is good news, since removing tracking parameters isn't strictly ad-blocking, right? It's important, yes, but at least we can rest assured for now, that ads won't suddenly start appearing on us and that uBO Legacy still remains extremely effective, notwithstanding running behind the WebExtension. Update: perhaps we should contact AdGuard to provide compatible filters.

I have tried Privoxy. Hated it! May work for other's needs, but not mine.

Agreed! SNAKE OIL

Not a bug, it's a design flaw. That's how Windows 7 ejects a USB flash drive. That's how KDE (Linux) ejects a USB flash drive. XP will power down on eject without any third-party apps. Unsure on 10 as I migrated my USB Safely Remove from XP installations.

Thanks for replying! First, I tried a basic installation, without any further settings or additional filter lists in Mypal 68.14.0b using the default multi-process mode. Only the pre-selected ones were loaded. So at first sight, all seemed to be fine. So, to answer your question the vanilla install works. But if I enable the default filter list AdGuard - Ads, all is over. Here is a screenshot showing this error state: Same when enabling the default filter lists AdGuard Tracking Protection and AdGuard URL Tracking Protection. Endless loading of these lists. The complete uBlock Origin installation becomes inaccessible. Even a restart can't do anything. The GUI of uBlock Origin's dashboard page is then completely broken. Here is a screenshot showing the broken tab Filter lists: Therefore, I had to uninstall it due to a complete breakage in accessing other websites by the browser. BTW, you mentioned my reported issue here https://github.com/Feodor2/Mypal68/issues/426. Unfortunately without the important information that this issue only happens in multi-process mode but not in single-process mode. Maybe, you can add this missing information. Is anyone here who can confirm this issue I observed? Regarding your statement that the logger doesn't work in single-process mode, I can't confirm that. Working here as far as I can see. Tested in uBlock Origin 1.57.2. Greetings, AstroSkipper

oops, this is a false positive due to bad coding practice. problem is inside wintz.cpp and I finally got it fixed. https://github.com/roytam1/UXP/commit/92e1373e8c7dc28bcc715aaad0bd9558b11a7909 (EDIT: from my limited testing, it seems to be fine with AutoDST on or off, so no further change will be made about it)

In my experience, all those memory "saving features", including this one, and the infamous "refresh" only consume more RAM. https://github.com/win32ss/supermium/issues/507#issuecomment-2071376972

It sounds more like a bug, what other tools did you try, interesting?

Most likely it depends on the outer box maker. I use this Philips on the image below, it does power down with other USB tools, including Vista's built in, but you wouldn't know, would you? Somewhere in 2006-2007 Philips launches the World's First 1TB External HDD, I bought several ones at once, some of them where upgraded to another HDD sizes, like 2TB, but the boxes are the same, made by Philips, all aluminium.

I use "USB Safely Remove" because I had it when I ran XP which was right up to just a month ago. It's a "must" for me because the built-in modern Windows USB eject does not power down the USB device first, the built-in will halt all read/write activity but it forces you to remove the USB device WHILE POWERED.

Not sure if this is useful as it would need to be backported but Microsoft had released a eMMC Hotfix for W8.1 https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/emmc-device-is-not-detected-as-a-storage-device-by-windows-8-1-or-windows-server-2012-r2-ee95ef54-081c-135c-f38e-142cc4dbbf14 The hotfix can be downloaded from here : https://thehotfixshare.net/board/index.php?/files/file/20824-windows81-kb3078919-x64msu/ (64bit) https://thehotfixshare.net/board/index.php?/files/file/20825-windows81-kb3078919-x86msu/ (32bit) Contains dumpsd.sys and sdbus.sys and sdbus.inf fileversion 6.3.9600.17931 from July 2015

For those who have missed, "Zentimo xStorage Manager" is a re-branded "USB Safely Remove" from XP days, both made by Crystal Rich Ltd, 194356, Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg, Kompozitorov 4-132. It even has an absolutely identical UI! Now, I wonder, why would they go with a new name? In any case, third party tools may heavily compromise security of Windows, especially when there's a simple way built in modern Windows, starting with Vista.

Hi, bookie32, actually there should be "Safely Remove Hardware" icon on the taskbar with a dedicated USB icon. https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/safely-remove-hardware-in-windows-1ee6677d-4e6c-4359-efca-fd44b9cec369