360 Extreme Explorer Modified Version

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I just ran an SRWare Iron v48 (could not find a v49) first-run and saw two Google connections and one Microsoft connection all within 10 seconds of launch.

Then it proceeded to connect to some Google Translate IP Addresses when navigating around in the settings pages.

At that point, I exited because this has become a total and complete waste of time in my view.

And I may have missed a few because I had to set the startup page to about:blank - which should be the out-of-the-box default for ALL browsers (you can't really catch all startup shenanigans when it is loading a "default page").

We really are blowing this single solitary gstatic connection way out of proportion.

Because EVERYTHING that I have looked at shows us to have 360Chrome down to one single solitary gstatic connection with no unique identifier of any kind and every other browser on the planet is making SEVERAL "connections" that nobody seems to really even care about.

No offense guys, as I've reported over and over, this project isn't about compiling Iron 2.0 (but we can't call it that now, Iron makes first-run connections also!), it is about creating a browser we can "trust".

We will never satisfy the Archie McPhee Tin Foil Hat crowd.

I wholly and fully "trust" 360Chrome - even moreso after watching connections being made by other browsers whose user-base just trusts them blindly without question.

[Dixel]

6 hours ago, XPerceniol said:

Thank you for the offer to allow me to test your browser build @Dixel as I understand you'd rather not publish it openly

@XPerceniol , yes , I already told you . I'll give it to you , in fact it's been prepared already . Just shoot me a message .< I'll reply.  @ArcticFoxie , give me a chance to reply ! You're bombarding me with questions, I'm sorry , I have a job and/or personal needs , like sleeping. I understand you have lots of energy and plenty of free time , lol.

I'll answer later. Thanks for the attention.

[Humming Owl]

Updated v9, v11 and v12.

- Changed the homepage to "chrome://newtab/".

- Erased some other stuff on the "chrome.dll" file.

I have a backup of the older ones in case something happens.

Cheers.

 

[Humming Owl]

2 hours ago, IXOYE said:

Hi

There is nothing to do it's a kernel32.dll error at startup of 360Chrome V9 and V11 under x86 xp sp2.This error does not occur under xp sp3. That's why I was asking why the Chinese made 360Chrome V12 and V13 compatible with xp sp2 kernel32.dll, while the older V9 and V11 were not compatible with x86 xp sp2 kernel32.dll.

 

I do not know if some Chromium flag could do something.

With respect to your question I do not know anything on why they built the browser that way.

Maybe from this link you can get something --> https://groups.google.com/g/angleproject/c/8wo3crBpats

[NotHereToPlayGames]

2 hours ago, Humming Owl said:

Updated v9, v11 and v12.

Do you recall why the below section was replaced for v12?

 

- Offset (h) = 02bc54a0

Replaced the "68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 73 6F 2E 33 36 30 2E 63 6E 2F 73 3F 71 3D 25 73 26 73 72 63 3D 33 36 30 63 68 72 6F 6D 65 5F 61 64 64 72 26 69 65 3D 75 74 66 2D 38 00 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 77 77 77 2E 62 61 69 64 75 2E 63 6F 6D 2F 62 61 69 64 75 3F 77 6F 72 64 3D 25 73 00 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 63 6E 2E 62 69 6E 67 2E 63 6F 6D 2F 73 65 61 72 63 68 3F 71 3D 25 73 00 26 69 65 3D 00 26 75 65 3D" hexadecimal code by 00 hexadecimal values

[Humming Owl]

1 hour ago, ArcticFoxie said:

Do you recall why the below section was replaced for v12?

 

- Offset (h) = 02bc54a0

Replaced the "68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 73 6F 2E 33 36 30 2E 63 6E 2F 73 3F 71 3D 25 73 26 73 72 63 3D 33 36 30 63 68 72 6F 6D 65 5F 61 64 64 72 26 69 65 3D 75 74 66 2D 38 00 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 77 77 77 2E 62 61 69 64 75 2E 63 6F 6D 2F 62 61 69 64 75 3F 77 6F 72 64 3D 25 73 00 68 74 74 70 3A 2F 2F 63 6E 2E 62 69 6E 67 2E 63 6F 6D 2F 73 65 61 72 63 68 3F 71 3D 25 73 00 26 69 65 3D 00 26 75 65 3D" hexadecimal code by 00 hexadecimal values

The "Switch to another search engine when the default one is not available" option originally showed 3 search engines Bing, Baidu and So. That hex code has the URLs of those 3 search engines side by side and I figured I could disable that option by overriding that code. From the tests I did I think the option originally does nothing but I decided to modify it anyway.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Got it, thanks!

[we3fan]

21 hours ago, Humming Owl said:

Can you send a picture of the error you get when running v9 and v11? Maybe something can be done.

Hi @Humming Owl, this is what I get when I try to start v9 and v11 on Win XP Pro x86 SP2:

I think v9 and v11 use a function that requires SP3, maybe if that function is removed it could work on SP2. I could be wrong.

[Dixel]

On 7/21/2021 at 10:10 PM, UCyborg said:

I don't know what's an issue here, but V13 didn't have a problem on later OS with same user profile data when I tested it last time. I've tested V9 - V12 from this thread and those are OK on XP (they're not set to block web fonts out-of-the-box neither).

Talking about only video playback aspect, from my testing in my environment, there are multiple factors. V13 appears a bit faster post XP, of course I made sure to disable HW acceleration on newer OS. Seems to have gotten slower in general with V12 (though affects XP the most, showing playback controls on YouTube make a hard performance hit). V11 appears most performant overall.

They're recent enough and if they were a problem (haven't gone researching how the one I have ties to CA certificates), it would show in Chrome 49 as well, not just V13. V9 - V12 all OK on XP.

1 - I don't know anything about v13. on "later OS" . The latest for me is Vista x64 and it doesn't have any problems , like I said . Perhaps it's because you're using another version ? Try 1106 "beta", it's good . 

2- And what environment would that be ? (specs , OS) What do you mean by "newer OS" , is it Vista and up ? I'm sorry I thought you're on XP , right ?

3- Did you or did you not try to install that cert. pack . I remember I started to get cert. errors somewhere around May 2021 . I installed his pack (without SHA-2 updates) and all problems just vanished . I can't replicate your issues with any on these versions on Vista x64 , sorry. 

About youtbue , try to change your UA , perhaps your slownees is due to numerous scripts and bloat coming from youtube ? Do you have a good adblocker ? Try using mobile user agent from iphone , maybe ? Youtube will load less scripts/bloat if you're on iphone.

Other things to consider , try using 344.xx or 347.xx drivers if you're on GTX. 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Dixel
suggestions

[Humming Owl]

8 hours ago, we3fan said:

Hi @Humming Owl, this is what I get when I try to start v9 and v11 on Win XP Pro x86 SP2:

I think v9 and v11 use a function that requires SP3, maybe if that function is removed it could work on SP2. I could be wrong.

Hello. I found some information that could be useful but I need you to test it on XP SP2 to see if it actually works. I tested this on Win7 with v9 and the "chrome.dll" file.

The "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" function is present in the code of the "chrome.dll" file of v9. With HxD you can directly search for the "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" entry (Offset (h) = 01b312c0) in "chrome.dll" (screenshot 1 below).

After replacing the code by 00 hexadecimal values I got the same error dialog but with no entry point (screenshot 2 below).

After replacing "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" by "GetL0gicalProcessorInformation" I got the same error dialog but with "GetL0gicalProcessorInformation" (screenshot 3 below) so I thought that maybe changing the function name could result into something rather than erasing the code completely.

In this webpage --> https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/sysinfoapi/nf-sysinfoapi-getlogicalprocessorinformation

I saw that for the "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" function is required the SP3 update. In the left side of the page are a lot of functions and saw the "GetLocalTime" function that needed only Windows 2000 to work and decided to change "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" by "GetLocalTime" (screenshot 4 below) and the browser launched without errors. I am not sure if this type of modification could work directly but I can tell that when you do this it is probable that you will get another error but will be with a different function. If that happens then you can switch that other function by "GetLocalTime" and see if it actually do something.

It will be very strange if this works with one change but I can not test it myself. Other files that have the "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" function are "chrome_child.dll" and "libglesv2.dll".

Screenshots:

1 --> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Zpjmb3nyJZUdAL5hBQgBtiVJe0R6f8Yl/view?usp=sharing

2 --> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XhUttESaW0lNN7pHTikM7QDqnly9O64t/view?usp=sharing

3 --> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P1m1KvOSBVpAK_oPhIFLK08LG8N7iRro/view?usp=sharing

4 --> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yyuxn8j9kG7MZl39K6QZ0Lp9-NZE6x-B/view?usp=sharing

 

Cheers.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Humming Owl

[UCyborg]

@Dixel
I'm mostly just noting observations with this browser on XP. Not really looking to fix/improve anything.

1 hour ago, Humming Owl said:

I saw that for the "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" function is required the SP3 update. In the left side of the page are a lot of functions and saw the "GetLocalTime" function that needed only Windows 2000 to work and decided to change "GetLogicalProcessorInformation" by "GetLocalTime" (screenshot 4 below) and the browser launched without errors.

This will corrupt the stack and cause a crash if it's ever called unless you also manage to safely disable the code that calls it and processes its result. The code may only be called in specific circumstances that the user may never encounter (maybe the call is a part of some diagnostic code).

[we3fan]

Thanks Humming Owl, I really appreciate it. I'll see what I can do.

I will have this in mind UCyborg, thanks.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

@Humming Owl - have you observed any of your modifications breaking 'internal' Unicode support?

As an example, in Modified v12, you have an entry where you changed "Edit Search Engines(&amp;E)..." to "Edit Search Engines..."

And both the original and the replacement entry are THREE DOTS.

But a Unicode entry of … instead of ... (highlight each of those and you will see that one is one character (unicode horizontal ellipsis) and the other is three characters (three dots) will be shown as a square in the GUI (ie, unicode support is broken).

Another example, there is an entry in your notes where you changed "More…" (original with unicode horizontal ellipsis) to "More..." (you replaced unicode horizontal ellipsis with three dots, directly above "speeded" to "Speeded" entry in v12 notes) - did you do this because of a square being rendered in your GUI?

I ask because the original untouched 360EE (v13 at least) does allow unicode characters but somewhere along the line both you and I are now using non-unicode throughout.

I don't know "where" along the lines that the original unicode support broke but at the same time we haven't broke unicode support for the web pages that we are rendering, only the text strings of the GUI.

Edited July 25, 2021 by ArcticFoxie

[Humming Owl]

19 hours ago, we3fan said:

Thanks Humming Owl, I really appreciate it. I'll see what I can do.

I will have this in mind UCyborg, thanks.

Your welcome. If you need help fell free to ask for it.

1 hour ago, ArcticFoxie said:

@Humming Owl - have you observed any of your modifications breaking 'internal' Unicode support?

As an example, in Modified v12, you have an entry where you changed "Edit Search Engines(&amp;E)..." to "Edit Search Engines..."

And both the original and the replacement entry are THREE DOTS.

But a Unicode entry of … instead of ... (highlight each of those and you will see that one is one character (unicode horizontal ellipsis) and the other is three characters (three dots) will be shown as a square in the GUI (ie, unicode support is broken).

Another example, there is an entry in your notes where you changed "More…" (original with unicode horizontal ellipsis) to "More..." (you replaced unicode horizontal ellipsis with three dots, directly above "speeded" to "Speeded" entry in v12 notes) - did you do this because of a square being rendered in your GUI?

I ask because the original untouched 360EE (v13 at least) does allow unicode characters but somewhere along the line both you and I are now using non-unicode throughout.

I don't know "where" along the lines that the original unicode support broke but at the same time we haven't broke unicode support for the web pages that we are rendering, only the text strings of the GUI.

The Unicode characters do display on the GUI, they are just not written exactly as the character. If you paste directly the ellipsis character in the file it does display as a square. Try replacing the 3 dots by "…". Well, at least for me the ellipsis displays when writing that code.

I think that the "icudtl.dat" file is the one that is related to special Unicode characters. You can tell because of the first line. 

Cheers.

Edited July 25, 2021 by Humming Owl

[Gansangriff]

Okay... back with some 360EE testing, this time in a Windows XP VM. I'm afraid I have to say, "interesting" connections keep happening in the background on startup. I'm afraid too, that other methods than measuring the whole web traffic over your line might not show this. How I do it actually is to use another computer play network bridge over 2 LAN ports. One LAN cable plugs into the computer of the "web user", the other LAN cable into the router. I think that way I'm not missing anything.

These strange connections on the startup of 360EE aren't successful. They run into the empty void. But! Between some garbage names there was a DNS and Netbios query for the name "VIBZBOX" in my local network. That's not a random name. It only happened once as far as I can see.

Is my router not right? I don't think so! These connections only happen with the 360EE. This time I tested the modified version of V12. One connection to "cloud.brwoser.360.cn" has been made. Eeeek! Leave me alone, I don't want to participate in some cloud...

Say, are we speaking about the right links, where I download these modified versions of 360EE from? Dammit, it say's "updated" with the current date behind it on the first post, so these must be the right versions.
*sigh* I'll have another look at this in another network.