Jump to content

Vistaboy

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    126

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    Italy

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Vistaboy

    uBlock Origin, Chromium 54 and Firefox 52.9 ESR

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    On 1/7/2021 at 8:32 PM, Sampei.Nihira said:

    If the blocking of ads also prevents the opening of pop-ups with possible malware content as a secondary effect, this decreases in value for those who use the Kees1958 list + Noscript.

    Not to mention the rule: 

    
||HTTP://*^$third-party,~stylesheet,~media,~image

    This simple single rule blocks all third-party requests (including XMLHTTPrequest, WebSocket, WebRTC, Ping, Object and ObjectSubrequests and Other e.g. beacons), so it provides more protection than uB0 medium mode protection which ‘only’ blocks third-party scripts and (i)frames (subdocuments in AdBlockPlus syntax).

    It is possible to calculate today that the simple rule above alone blocks at least 30-40% of malicious websites.

    I believe I am sufficiently protected even in a W.XP OS if we consider that uBlock Origin is only a small part of my security configuration.:yes::hello:

    My fault, never fallen in love with Noscript because of his aggressivity and tricky learning curve

    But i've borrowed that great rule, applied and saved it in a uBlock backup folder for future reference :worship::hello:

    0

    uBlock Origin, Chromium 54 and Firefox 52.9 ESR

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

    I have two custom lists that are more efficient than the predefined ones:

    1) Extremely Condensed Adblocking List

    2) EU US most prevalent ads & trackers ABP format

    And as you can see I have also entered the specific language list:

    2A) EasyList Italy (minified)

    These lists are more than enough to stop ADS.

    Note that I also use Noscript.

    Those who don't use Noscript can set uBlock Origin in medium mode.

    To get an ADS block with identical effect.

     

    :hello:

    Thanks for detailed answer. I think you're perfectly right on positive effects of decreasing adblock entries for a smooth efficitent web browsing, but the next warning (not cited) quote of Extremely Condensed Adblocking List:

    Quote

    Beware that this list doesn't have nearly as good coverage against malware sites as what EasyList has

    let me think that for an old OS like XP (moreover whose source code getting leaked) it's maybe little better to give priority to safety at the expense of efficiency adblock listing. But in W7-W10 scenario your choice it's really worth of implementing.

    :hello:

    1

    My Browser Builds (Part 2)

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    3 hours ago, roytam1 said:

    tenfourfox has no development in these months

    Thank you roytam1. It's only for knowing that this XP browser option now it's really better to put it aside, in favor of great other alternatives. Personally for this old desktop snail i found Mypal really impressive in terms of speed in front of FF45+: there's only one thing that can't understand why it's broke and that is the language pack (IT in my case) that, despite seems to be upgraded, continues to not work as it is not even installed.

    Everything, from the bar to the right-click-mouse options, remain in native EN language

    blob.png.d8f4f0bebdd2eedc1b699fb04dd80679.png 

    0

    Windows Vista Modernisation Guide

    in Windows Vista

    Posted

    Good idea the guide, despite scrambled in SDI vs Driver Booster war and windows update issue.

    For the latter, i've used WSUSOffline v10.9.2 (last version supporting Vista) to download everything - Vista Box Checked on a clean installation of Vista SP2, and after that used a more recent WSUSOffline (don't remember the version) to download everything - Server 2008 Box Checked to get all the compatible Vista updates after Vista EOL.

    2

    My Browser Builds (Part 2)

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    5 hours ago, VistaLover said:

    Please update it to the next release, v1.6.8; on Monday, Dec 16th, uBlock0-legacy was updated to v1.16.14.12 and, at that time, uB0-updater v1.6.7 was working OK; but next day apparently, GitHub broke it, yet again, by changing their page source :angry: ; methinks this wasn't just pure coincidence, but a deliberate attempt at sabotaging this extension :realmad: ; in any case, it was yours truly (;)) who reported the breakage to the maintainer, 

    https://github.com/JustOff/ublock0-updater/issues/19

    who came up with working version 1.6.8 :cheerleader:; BTW, what keeps your installed version 1.6.7 from updating automatically to 1.6.8 ?
    Festive regards :)

     

    I think FF45 generally mess up with automatic extensions update: i have that option permanently checked but never see in a long time it's working. I always have to go in relative setting (wheel) and manually check update to get some response :rolleyes:

    Merry holidays :hello:

    0

    My Browser Builds (Part 2)

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted · Edited by Vistaboy

    On 12/18/2019 at 7:43 PM, VistaLover said:

    Sometimes, the problem of the uBlock0-legacy toolbar button going AWAL after a browser restart, especially on browsers that also support Web Extensions, can be mitigated by setting (in about:config):  

    extensions.ublock0.forceLegacyToolbarButton;true

    The "LegacyToolbarButton" of "legacy" uB0 might better co-exist in the toolbar with adjacent buttons from other XUL extensions! ;)

     

    qOBuoZZ.png

    This updater extension doesn't work at all, not even notified of the update.

    0

    AOL Shield browser now available for Windows XP and Vista

    in Windows XP

    Posted

    On 12/8/2019 at 4:10 AM, caliber said:

     there are other junk sites like this one that claim XP compatibility, you only know if its XP capable once you donwload the software

    Same deprecable and unprofessional attitude on SWRare Iron:

    tRqIoTA.png

    ZOCPA7c.png

    szyIWJr.png

    Can't believe someone claims Chromium 78.0.4050 eligible for XP.

    They're better at selling pots or smoke without roast!

     

    0

    My Browser Builds (Part 2)

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    10 hours ago, msfntor said:

    @looking4awayout,

    your github page instantly opens in the latest Roytam1's firefox 45 with 9 extensions here (in 1.17 seconds) ...

    Work for me too, clean profile no patched yet, only Ublock Origin 1.16.4.11.

    Some other extensions (freshly installed) work but after i close FF45.9 and re-open it they go in "stand-byesque" status and don't work anymore. But it's not a irreversible state as in the panel extensions/add-ons clicking on disactivate and activate does the trick and every suspended extensions is back to work.

    2

    Root Certificates and Revoked Certificates for Windows XP

    in Windows XP

    Posted

    On 11/11/2019 at 5:27 PM, Mathwiz said:

    Images often downloaded separately from the email that contains them because they're so large. Outlook uses IE to download these images. If IE can't download an image you'll get the red X, but there are lots of reasons IE might not be able to download from a particular server besides a certificate problem. For example, there may not be a TLS cipher that both the server and IE support. You may find that installing @heinoganda's version of ProxHTTPSProxyMII will resolve many of those download failures.

    ProxHTTPSProxy is really wonderful tool. It allows access to many sites blocked and also to private & pubblic institution website not avaible before partially or totally (graphic defects/certificate errors/lack of visualization elements/address not reachable).

    The question is: can we safely access these sites, through the ProxHTTPSProxy, entering sensitive credentials without any risk whatsoever (privacy, data theft, etc..)?

    I suppose ProxHTTPSProxy couldn't expose severe security holes (otherwise Mr. Heinoganda would have warned about it) but, just to clear the field of doubts, are any security implications known?  

    0

    My Browser Builds (Part 1)

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    20 hours ago, VistaLover said:

    @Vistaboy : Please do what @looking4awayout did (and it's the thing I always recommend when troubleshooting): create a new pristine FxESR 45.x.x profile, devoid of any extensions; safe mode only disables extensions and some gfx related features (e.g. HW acceleration, if applicable), but doesn't negate the existing prefs.js file inside your dirty profile!

    You didn't tell us how your existing profile was initially created; often times, profile corruption due to mysterious extension interactions/conflicts, extension upgrades/downgrades and profile migration from different browser versions (from a higher Fx version to a lower one, not to mention between Firefox forks) may be the source of difficult to dissect issues...

    BTW, can you still bookmark a URL via other approaches, e.g. the "star" toolbar button?

    Best regards :)

    Finally everything it's working, thank you for the correct advices: it was just a corrupted profile due to frequent switches between Firefox forks. Now i can bookmark in all the ways single star/all open tabs :thumbup

    2

    The UOC and QUOC Patch - Optimize Firefox (and derivatives) for old hardware!

    in Browsers working on Older NT-Family OSes

    Posted

    On 4/3/2019 at 3:35 PM, looking4awayout said:

    UPDATE: A little tip

    I discovered that there are some parameters that for some reasons, the patch ignores, but they can be edited manually in the about:config. Here they are:

    image.mem.max_decoded_image_kb  -  512000

    browser.urlbar.maxRichResults  -  1

    browser.sessionstore.restore_on_demand - False

    webgl.force-layers-readback - False

    webgl.enable-privileged-extensions - True

    webgl.enable-draft-extensions - True

    dom.enable_performance_observer - True

    dom.performance.enable_notify_performance_timing - True

    dom.performance.enable_user_timing_logging - True

    dom.ipc.plugins.asyncdrawing.enabled - True

    plugin.allow.asyncdrawing - True

    layers.async-pan-zoom.enabled - False

     

    After installing on F45ESR new release the UOC_Patch + Enforcer i found all the quoted parameters set correctly as above, except for the following: 

    browser.urlbar.maxRichResults  -  1    

    That one was set to 12. Is it 1 ok or there's a missing "2"?

    0
×
×
  • Create New...