3 hours ago, XP4ever said:

Very strange reaction from developers: it is difficult to reproduce, really?

And then just silently closed as "obsolete", huh... looks more like intentional "feature", and very few people actually care... No, really: how many users do actually care about botnet on their PCs, if it does not overheat the CPU more, then antivirus-spyguard-blah-blah-security-feature, that reports nothing?

I wrote, I get the same spinning discs like you . I used this browser (old version) for some time but tried this one only after your reply just out of curiosity !

Also my firewall sometimes told me "incoming traffic prevented".

2 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

Also my firewall sometimes told me "incoming traffic prevented".

That's why modern browsers have more and more spyware features: their outgoing traffic looks so natural and appropriate...

10 minutes ago, XP4ever said:

Not really. Portability has nothing to do with leftovers that are not affecting the functionality.

The first one is called "standalone".

The portable is the second one.

I've not seen anyone else distinguishing between "portable" and "standalone" (I've seen definition of standalone in different context), but people in general seem to agree "portable" programs do not write to registry and leave registry entries/files on the system. Well, the forensic evidence that 360chrome.exe was run may remain regardless, but in this case, there will also be evidence left that something was written in registry of current logged in user by the application. The launcher doesn't overwrite application's entries in registry with junk before deleting, does it?

Ungoogled Chromium claims to have flags/command-line arguments to disable user data encryption (--disable-machine-id --disable-encryption), so they're not tied to the specific user profile/machine anymore. I have not personally verified these claims, but I imagine transplanting those patches, if they work, to closed-source browser discussed here could take quite some effort or at least be annoying to do, if possible to implement.

2 hours ago, UCyborg said:

The launcher doesn't overwrite application's entries in registry with junk before deleting, does it?

For this purpose it's just enough to give that registry entry a name of some SHS256 hash from some random number.

However:

 

Never ran any "360chrome" besides of one "portable" mentioned in my first comment here.

2 hours ago, UCyborg said:

I've not seen anyone else distinguishing between "portable" and "standalone" (I've seen definition of standalone in different context), but people in general seem to agree "portable" programs do not write to registry and leave registry entries/files on the system.

Oh that brave new world we are living in now! Unportability is called "portability", spyware is "security featue"... "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength"

Edited December 11, 20223 yr by XP4ever
Funny typo

2 hours ago, XP4ever said:

And then just silently closed as "obsolete", huh... looks more like intentional "feature", and very few people actually care... No, really: how many users do actually care about botnet on their PCs, if it does not overheat the CPU more, then antivirus-spyguard-blah-blah-security-feature, that reports nothing?

All 360Chrome browser editions (including 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022) I have tested on my Windows XP system cause BSODs due to my AV program WiseVector StopX which seems to try stopping strange accesses and behaviour of these browsers. I had to add them completely to both exclusions lists (general and advanced) in WiseVector StopX what I usually do not need to do with other browsers, otherwise these 360Chrome browsers would continue generating BSODs and would be unusuable for me. Frankly, I am not happy with that and use them only if necessary. Not to mention the enormous consumption of system resources, especially with regard to the browser edition of this thread, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022. 

Edited December 11, 20223 yr by AstroSkipper

3 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

All 360Chrome browser editions (including 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022) I have tested on my Windows XP system cause BSODs due to my AV program WiseVector StopX which seems to try stopping strange accesses and behaviour of these browsers. I had to add them completely to both exclusions lists (general and advanced) in WiseVector StopX what I usually do not need to do with other browsers, otherwise these 360Chrome browsers would continue generating BSODs and would be unusuable for me. Frankly, I am not happy with that and use them only if necessary. Not to mention the enormous consumption of system resources, especially with regard to the browser edition of this thread, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022. 

Thank you very much, you know I always value your opinion and advice and have 100% trust in your experience.

I don't remember you wrote it before though, perhaps I missed it ? Sorry if I did !

WiseVector StopX is Chinese , so it knows where to look ! Now you discovered a virus in these !?

Nice, this is getting more and more interesting ! Wait a minute, lemme get my popcorn.

 

5 hours ago, XP4ever said:

For this purpose it's just enough to give that registry entry a name of some SHS256 hash from some random number.

However:

 

Never ran any "360chrome" besides of one "portable" mentioned in my first comment here.

Oh that brave new world we are living in now! Unportability is called "portability", spyware is "security featue"... "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength"

Not only here, if you search in older topics, they wrote it is in more locations.

3 hours ago, D.Draker said:

Not to mention the enormous consumption of system resources, especially with regard to the browser edition of this thread, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022.

With these latest discoveries it would be easy to explain now ! Perhaps it hides the malware/virus/tracking in these enormous areas of RAM ?

45 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

All 360Chrome browser editions (including 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022) I have tested on my Windows XP system cause BSODs due to my AV program WiseVector StopX which seems to try stopping strange accesses and behaviour of these browsers. I had to add them completely to both exclusions lists (general and advanced) in WiseVector StopX what I usually do not need to do with other browsers, otherwise these 360Chrome browsers would continue generating BSODs and would be unusuable for me. Frankly, I am not happy with that and use them only if necessary. Not to mention the enormous consumption of system resources, especially with regard to the browser edition of this thread, 360Chrome v13.5 build 2022. 

I do NOT use WiseVector StopX, but SterJo NetStalker (by sterjosoft.com), which too filter traffic bad connections, constantly monitoring... and never had problem with 360Chrome ArcticFoxie builds...Never. So I've cofidence of ArcticFoxie work.

So your Wise software are hmm too sensitive?....

Inflammatory and sneering remarks about other people's work are not welcome here.
Please desist from this.

18 minutes ago, D.Draker said:

WiseVector StopX is Chinese , so it knows where to look ! Now you discovered a virus in these !?

I did not say that a virus is inside these browsers. I stated that these 360Chrome browsers perform actions and accesses which WiseVector StopX detects and tries to block, unfortunately leading to a BSOD again and again. Only setting exclusions helps which is not really a good solution. 

6 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Ungoogled Chromium claims to have flags/command-line arguments to disable user data encryption (--disable-machine-id --disable-encryption), so they're not tied to the specific user profile/machine anymore. I have not personally verified these claims, but I imagine transplanting those patches, if they work, to closed-source browser discussed here could take quite some effort or at least be annoying to do, if possible to implement.

I had an anwser for this but someone deleted my reply. Looks like a secret information. I guess you could find it at the real ungoogled developer forum.

2 minutes ago, AstroSkipper said:

360Chrome browsers perform actions and accesses which WiseVector StopX detects

Which "actions and accesses"? I've none.

3 hours ago, AstroSkipper said:

I did not say that a virus is inside these browsers. I stated that these 360Chrome browsers perform actions and accesses which WiseVector StopX detects and tries to block, unfortunately leading to a BSOD again and again. Only setting exclusions helps which is not really a good solution. 

OK ! So you confirm they perform actions. How am I (we) allowed to call these actions ? Malicious ? Or multiple BSODs and 10x times RAM consumtion are still not enough to call them that ?  Thanks.