NotHereToPlayGames

Agreed. I personally find it extremely narrow-minded how Firefox users boycott Chromium-based browsers. If you are on the internet, you are being tracked to some degree, period! We do our best to limit the tracking, but I really do believe that Firefox users turn a blind eye to the tracking that Firefox employs and they go into epileptic shock whenever they hear the word "Chromium" or "Chrome". I sometimes feel like I should play Devil's Advocate and create a new member account and post telemetry findings left and right on every Firefox Fanatic Forum I can find. Don't get me wrong. I used Firefox (in the form of Pale Moon, Mypal, and New Moon) for YEARS. But times change - several of my web sites NO LONGER WORK in Pale Moon, Mypal, and New Moon! And it's not an XP Thing, the web sites DO NOT WORK in Pale Moon, Mypal, and New Moon on Win 7 or Win 10 either! I keep my eyes open and test new releases. MAYBE one of these days I will return to Firefox-based browsers. But when web sites DO NOT WORK, then I really have very limited options. And this really does SAY IT ALL -- Chrome global market share = 65.2% Firefox global market share = 3.7% There is a REASON that Firefox is so LOW. And Firefox users really should wake up if they are TRULY concerned with "fingerprinting" -- it is MUCH easier to find a needle in a TINY haystack then it is to find one in a GIGANTIC haystack. "Fingerprinting" has nothing to do with blocking fonts, blocking User Agent, blocking resolution detection. "Fingerprinting" is about having 30 or 40 metrics, being able to detect only 6 to 10 of those metrics, and you are uniquely identified by only those 6 to 10. Forensics don't need an entire "fingerprint", they only need a very small portion of the fingerprint to "identify" the felon. But anyway...

Will see if I can reproduce this.

Agreed. So the "test" is NOT about whether or not your browser "itself" is vulnerable to fingerprinting. The "test" SHOULD BE "does this website engage in fingerprinting" and if the answer is YES, then boycott the $h!t out of that website. Otherwise, if you trust that website to the extent of becoming a member, registering, and logging in, then, um, you have OPTED IN to that website "knowing" who you are, fingerprint or not. The point really boils down to this, if your level of paranoia wants to live in a cardboard box under a bridge, by all means, it's not for me to tell you were to pitch your tent. But let's stop acting like dogs trying to bite a flea on the tip of its tail. If you don't trust the website you are visiting, then HELLO, why did you visit it? Really seems that simple to me. Moving on... I have my paradigm, others have theirs... MSFN threads don't alter people's perspectives...

I have to ALLOW javascript in order for all three of those to "fingerprint" me. SELF-DEFEATING. That's like telling a hoodlum, "I want to test if you can break into my house, I'll leave the back door open, not just unlocked, I'll leave it wide open, all you need to do is find my house."

Even the EFF site states, "Browsers which set the DNT header to ‘1’ are fairly rare, and this can be an identifying metric." It is my view, "mileage may vary", that the more RARE you make yourself to be, the more UNIQUE you are to advertisers, they know EXACTLY who you are because of your "uniqueness". I would much rather be one needle among thousands of needles buried in a haystack, I don't want to be so "unique" that I made myself the ONLY needle in that haystack.

I get "Our tests indicate that you have strong protection against Web tracking, though your software isn’t checking for Do Not Track policies." Looks to me like "propaganda" for "Do Not Track", something everybody in the universe knows doesn't work! It is VOLUNTARY and the web sites you visit DO NOT HAVE TO LISTEN TO IT -- https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/not-track-actually-work/ I got nothing against DNT, don't get me wrong. But it IS a "false sense of security" and users click that setting and think that's all they have to do, that they are not being tracked, and so they don't do anything else above and beyond that predominantly useless DNT.

Status update - Future releases will no longer be offered as one download for "regular" and one download for "ungoogled". I will now be releasing what will be labeled as an "aio" (All In One) release. The "regular" and the "ungoogled" only differ in one URL inside one API inside one file (resources.pak). Both resources.pak file will be included in the "aoi" but will default to "regular". Several AutoIt .exe files will be contained within the same folder that contains the 360Loader .exe/.ini. These AutoIt files are run-when-needed files for the end user to change between various file structures. Run the "Ungoogled Mode" AutoIt file and it creates the correct resouces.pak file so that next time you run the 360Loader, it runs as "ungoogled". Every future launch of 360Loader runs as "ungoogled". Run the "Regular Mode" AutoIt file and it creates the correct resources.pak file so that the next time you run the 360Loader, it runs as "regular". Every future launch of 360Loader runs as "regular". The end user could also opt to shortcut the AutoIt files instead of the regular 360Loader. Click the "Ungoogled Mode" shortcut and you launch as "ungoogled". Click the "Regular Mode" shortcut and you launch as "regular". The profile is shared between both modes. What this is going to extend into is also having an AutoIt file for the user to set their theme (if we had non-English folks interested in 360Chrome, we could use this method to also set translation files - but that user-base doesn't seem to exist). The "aio" will be uploaded with the default file structure for "Regular Mode" and for "XP Theme". If the end user wants "Dark Theme" as their default, they execute the "Dark Theme" AutoIt file and it will create the proper file structure so that every future launch of 360Loader runs with the "dark theme".

Agreed! And nowadays you actually stand out like a sore thumb and uniquely identify yourself when you falsely think you are "hiding". Fake a Win10 User Agent and you've added your needle to a gigantic haystack nearly impossible to find. Fake a cell phone User Agent then play a video four times the resolution of every cell phone on the market, you've told them EXACTLY who you are because you're the only person on the planet viewing such a large video resolution on a "cell phone".

Cool links. I chuckle at their writeup on Iridium -- https://spyware.neocities.org/guides/iridium.html I mean, in so far as those "settings" are always touted as "protection" and I wonder how many less-informed users enable them "in blind trust".

I personally have zero doubt that you are capable of such. But I also do strongly feel that "most" Firefox users (MSFN members excluded!) flock to Firefox not because they possess such capabilities but rather a BLIND TRUST towards Firefox. I have always found much more telemetry crap in Firefox browsers then I've ever found in Chromium browsers - though BOTH have TONS by "default". I have always found it very interesting how some folks (again, MSFN members excluded!) will 'pledge an allegiance' toward any one browser yet be totally clueless on the shenanigans that their own "trusted for years" beloved browser is doing behind their backs. edit: I should point out that I've always used ungoogled-chromium and never use "official" Chrome. Likewise, I've always used Pale Moon, Mypal, and New Moon and never use "official" Firefox.

360Chrome v12+ (does not work on v11). Current default is 360Chrome v13.5. Yep, both work on XP. I use Google Voice tied to a former employer's email address (that I still do consultant work for from time to time). I believe in Privacy Rights but at the same time have no desire to live in a shack in the hills with no electricity and only an outhouse for a restroom and a horse to tie to the light pole when I run into town. I don't believe in Privacy Rights to such an extreme where I can't bring myself to using Google versus DuckDuckGo and so Google Voice it is, free, zero phone bill, free texting, free phone calls. If you own a computer and it is connected to the internet, don't kid yourself for one second into thinking you "live off the grid" no matter how many hoops you jump through in the name of "privacy" and "security".

I personally do not own a phone (no land line, no cell phone, do all my calls for free from the computer [well, I pay for internet service, obviously]). My neighbor is currently being hit with the same no-3G early next year. Her company only pays out an annual "stipend" of $600. She is basically being forced to upgrade her phone and everything is all 5G and she's looking at $2,000 for a new phone!

I can't help but laugh that the original question was posted six months ago. And I second-vote Arctic Fox (it is no coincidence that my username is named after that browser).

Technically impossible. The only difference is basically no different than a HOSTS file entry.

frontside bus

Updated link in first post for v13.5 rebuild 3. Only file that has been updated since rebuild 2 is the iframe.srx file inside the Chrome\Application\13.5.1030.0\skin folder. Restores certificate padlock details dialog.

Noted, thanks.

The "restore" banner is very useful - to those that keep cookies and/or cache from one session to the next. The "restore" banner is totally useless - to those that delete cookies and/or cache from one session to the next. Unfortunately, that banner isn's smart enough to know if there is a session to restore or not so I kinda have to keep it, useful or useless. Ideally, we end up with something that never crashes or crashes so seldomly that it's not an issue one way or the other.

Isolated to alpha_3. Should have this corrected tomorrow.

#4 -- Yes and No. Yes if you change skin/theme to dark. No if you use my uploaded build as-is without making skin/theme changes. I will be making a dark theme eventually. #3 -- Don't click on the share link and the popup doesn't pop up. Or are you getting a QR Code popping up without clicking a link or context menu item first? I have not found a way to remove it from the context menu. #2 -- Good Catch! Didn't notice that until you mentioned it. I'll see what I can find. #1 -- Seems to be the result of hundreds of modifications, to be honest. I chose to NOT do any "blind" replacements and combed through the chrome.dll file line by line.

Hmmm, interesting. Will research and report back. I delete cookies and website data on every exit so my preferences file does not contain any data, but I do acknowledge that clearing cookies and website data on every exit shouldn't be the "only" way to utilize 360Chrome "comfortably".

But geniuses at turning a "paragraph" into "six words", mispellings and all, and the recipient can still somehow miraculously piece it together.

I've never once, ever, went to a search engine to research something and open up dozens upon dozens of informative results, research links leading to more research links, all very informative, never once have I ever landed on anything called "Discord". Reddit, yes. Even MSFN, yes. But never once has a search engine landed me on "Discord". So yeah, dead serious, never heard of it. Text/talk via voice and post gifs -- sounds like Snapchat or Instagram - if you don't mind the rib-jab, that sounds like the targeted audience is pre-teen and teen without the ability to focus on a topic and read any sentence with more than six words, throw some punctuation marks in there and you've totally lost them

I thought the Roytam thread had discussions regarding "polymer" and "Discord" ??? I don't recall and wasn't involved with the discussion because I have no clue what "Discord" is and never heard of it until users had issues with it and posted here on MSFN.

I've verified the blank page here and my normal "tricks" aren't finding any workaround.