r3dfox, a modern Firefox based web browser for Windows Vista, 7, and 8!

[NotHereToPlayGames]

31 minutes ago, K4sum1 said:

I don't think it's possible to fully disable it all.

A quick DNS-watch on roytam's New Moon 28 shows ZERO telemetry.  Same goes for feodor's MyPal 27 (not a typo, aware that there is a 68).

But I honestly do not recall if I had to jump through hoops to get them to ZERO telemetry as those two browser profiles are quite old.

At any rate, keep up the good work on r3dfox.

Edited August 15, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[K4sum1]

4 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

A quick DNS-watch on roytam's New Moon 28 shows ZERO telemetry.  Same goes for feodor's MyPal 27 (not a typo, aware that there is a 68).

New Moon 28 is a fork of 52, before a lot of the telemetry, and upstream or Pale Moon is worked on by a team of people. I am one person that is pretty dumb working on the much bigger latest Firefox codebase and I update from upstream instead of sticking to one old version.

[Guest]

****

 

 

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[K4sum1]

I use three Firefox based browsers for different tasks, and it's been a while since I've needed to open up Chromium.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

1 hour ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

It is usually good to have at least 2 browsers installed on your pc.

I used to think the same thing.  GOT FED UP with maintaining two profiles, keeping track of which bank account won't work in what, which can do Gmail but the other not do Google Voice, which can YouTube at 1080 versus 480, which can MS Teams, et cetera.

TIME IS TOO PRECIOUS.  I WANT *ONE* BROWSER THAT CAN DO *EVERYTHING*.

[Guest]

****

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[NotHereToPlayGames]

51 minutes ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

With r3dfox (Firefox) you could get what you are looking for

I have been experimenting with Firefox v128 (just now noticed it needs updated, but these metrics will be close to identical).

A hellashish and resounding NO!  (and apologies, I did not intend to turn this into a "browser war" thread - "been there, done that", there is a REASON (several) that I no longer use Firefox!)

But not to be misread - I still have an interest else I wouldn't be following this thread.

Look at my Serpent RAM usage - 1.24 GB with only TWO tabs open [I've seen this as high as FOUR GIGABYTES] (Gmail and Google Voice [which only works for chat, not for phone calls in Serpent]).

Firefox v128 with no tabs open and only ONE extension (uBO) = 172.8 + 310.2 + 20.5 + 37.6 + 33.9 + 88.5 + 36.5 + 28.5 + 28.5 + 28.5  ==  785.5 MB

Ungoogled v122 with no tabs open and only ONE extension (uBO) = 4.27 + 61.5 + 19.6 + 13.6 + 11.2 + 28.1 + 41.8 + 16.0  ==  196.1 MB

 

[Guest]

****

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[NotHereToPlayGames]

5 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

With r3dfox (Firefox) you could get what you are looking for,but you have to change the settings as I have already written in this thread.
In my opinion you also need at least 2 policies.

Also uBlock Origin,which I believe is the adblock extension you prefer works better in Firefox (r3dfox) than in Chromium-based browsers:

 

https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox

You falsely assume that Firefox+uBO is the "only" way to prevent CNAME cloaking.  IT ISN'T!

I use PROXOMITRON and despite nobody else here at MSFN being a Proxo User, it can detect and prevent canonical connections.

Here's one example.  The web site htt ps://  www. mathon .fr has a CNAME Cloaked connection to cdn. shopify .com that my PROXOMITRON blocks.

How is this (Chromium+Proxomitron) any different than Firefox *NEEDING* uBO to perform this block?

Either way you dice it, the BROWSER itself did not block the canonical connection!

The end-user needed to be SMART ENOUGH to ADD something to their browser (which both you and I obviously do).

 

 

Edited August 16, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[NotHereToPlayGames]

While not as foolproof as Chromium+Proxomitron or Firefox+uBO, according to https://github.com/AdguardTeam/cname-trackers, using "AdGuard Tracking Protection filter" or "EasyPrivacy" lists in Chromium+uBO is adequate protection for most users.

To be honest, I have never actually ran into a cloaked CNAME with my default setup!  I have to INTENTIONALLY let my guard down to find them (enable third-party cookies, allow third-party scripts, disable uMatrix entirely, disable Proxomitron, et cetera).

[Guest]

****

 

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[NotHereToPlayGames]

4 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

Adequate means NOT complete.

While I agree, I have to wholly and completely DISAGREE with this "the sky is falling approach".

You present the paradigm that CNAME cloaking is an "everyday occurrence" - I HAVE PERSONALLY NEVER WITNESSED ONE.

I have to basically browse with ALL of my "defenses" DISABLED and can only find a .fr example.  No .com examples.  No .net examples.  No .org examples.

Before we can proceed further, PLEASE PROVIDE A FEW REAL-LIFE EXAMPLES!  Not this "the sky is falling" tactic of THEORETICAL HYPERBOLE.

Let's be perfectly honest - IF this were an "issue" as gigantic as your hype and propaganda makes it out to be, then Firefox's marketshare would have SURGED since 2020 or so when BRAVE used this HYPE to boost their marketshare.

Which didn't really work.  I have NEVER, in REAL-LIFE, met ANYONE that uses BRAVE.

Again, I HAVE NEVER COME ACROSS A REAL-WORLD EXAMPLE.

I would love for a LIST of examples.  And they can NOT be .fr web sites, I am an English-speaking US citizen that NEVER visits .fr web sites.  It has to be a .com for me to take it "seriously".

HYPE AND PROPAGANDA.  THEORETICAL HYPERBOLE.

Edited August 17, 2024 by NotHereToPlayGames

[Guest]

****

 

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira

[NotHereToPlayGames]

No offense, but I'm kind of done here.

The sky is not falling.  Those lists don't help.  Those are third-party trackers.  I need the first-party URL that pulls in one of these third-party trackers.

And again, what is the purpose here if I have to DISABLE ALL OF MY CURRENT DEFENSE MECHANISMS ???

These things are so rare that I'm not gonna lose one second of sleep over them.

For one, it's a CACHE issue.  You have to visit both sites in order for a CNAME Cloak to pull something from Site A's *cache* and use it in Site B's *rendering*.

This really is a MUTE ISSUE for those like me that clear the cache between each and every session.

Again, the sky is not falling.  Brave tried to convince us it was.  Didn't work then, won't work now.

[Guest]

****

Edited September 4, 2024 by Sampei.Nihira