Mathwiz Posted May 18 Share Posted May 18 On 5/11/2024 at 2:10 AM, UCyborg said: 2574610432 bytes Off-topic, but this is a pet peeve of mine. Why doesn't Micro$oft (or anyone else, for that matter) print huge numbers like that with commas (or periods for Europe) - or, since we don't really need to know the RAM usage right down to the byte - just abbreviate it to 2.57 GB? It's virtually impossible to quickly gauge the magnitude of a long string of digits like that - instead you have to stare at it and count digits from right to left! It's as if they've forgotten that computers were invented to do drudgery like that for us! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 (edited) It is strange that many users prefer to use Supermium (249 open issues)/Thorium (78 open issues) than r3dfox (18 open issues). ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From a security point of view r3dfox outperforms both forks which have open vulnerabilities such as CVE-2024-5274 (Google is aware that an exploit for CVE-2024-5274 exists in the wild). On the security level,Thorium,in addition to the CVE written above has not patched adds CVE-2024-4947 + CVE-2024-4761 so it is worse to use than Supermium. Edited May 26 by Sampei.Nihira 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 Irrelevant! "To each their own." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 (edited) Certainly, everyone is free to use the browser of their choice. But whether it is irrelevant depends on your point of view. I still retain my paratrooper's license. And if I have to choose to jump with an intact parachute,over others with various and different structural problems.......I choose the one that for me is the best of all. Then again everyone is very free to do what they prefer. Have a good Sunday. Edited May 26 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 Yes. But at the same time both you and I are on Win10. I will not, ever, "preach security vulnerabilities" because MOST are hype and propaganda. I most especially "dislike" reading these "preaches" of "so-called" vulnerabilities on forums/browsers dedicated to OLDER OPERATING SYSTEMS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted May 26 Share Posted May 26 (edited) Security vulnerabilities are only 1-2/3. Most of the open issues involve "functionality" problems. This aspect seemed strange to me. It is strange to use browsers with so many functionality problems. Although this is probably due to the greater use of one browser over another. Edited May 26 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCyborg Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 Chromium just tends to be the most popular for some reason. Security vulnerabilities are popping up all the time in it. Regarding functional issues, more people using it, more combinations of things they click, more whining about banal things etc. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathwiz Posted May 27 Share Posted May 27 (edited) The number of open issues probably has a lot to do with how long each browser has been available. R3dfox has only been around for about 2 months. (This thread is only 4 pages long so far.) So it hasn't had much time to accumulate issue reports. Also, I think it's harder to modify modern browsers to work on XP/Vista, at least without "help" from OCAPI or the Vista extended kernel, than it is to modify them to run on 7/8/8.1. Support for the latter was removed only recently, so there's not as much code to change - thus, not as much opportunity for Murphy.... Edit: Speaking of XP/Vista, I saw on the R3dfox author's Github page a project called R3dfox Classic, a fork of Waterfox Classic. No work has been done on it AFAICS, but the readme says it'll be an XP/Vista version, I assume using techniques similar to what @feodor2 does to make MyPal 68 work on XP. Waterfox Classic was forked from FF 56, so if this comes to pass it'll probably look and act a lot like @roytam1's Serpent. The bad news, though, is that Waterfox Classic hasn't been updated since Nov. 2022, so there's a lot of catching up to do beyond making it XP compatible. Edited May 28 by Mathwiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted May 29 Share Posted May 29 (edited) I have read that some MSFN members use the browser with the native sandbox. Obviously those using Windows XP will be aware that the Chromium sandbox works worse than => Windows Vista. Not only for I.L. Also for TCP/IP: TCP/IP socket security in Windows 2000 and Windows XP (but not in Vista) is effectively null. Even those using FAT32 Volumes in this case the security descriptor on them is effectively null. https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src/+/refs/heads/main/docs/design/sandbox.md These are the differences with Mozilla-sandbox: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Security/Sandbox Therefore, it would be very interesting to see whether for the same operating system the Mozilla sandbox or the Chromium sandbox is more efficient. To check the level of the sandbox of r3dfox : about:support Edited May 29 by Sampei.Nihira 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) I did a test between uBlock Origin Lite vs uBlock Origin to see which of the two extensions makes the browser faster. I used the lists of filters I prefer in each extension. Considering that uBlock Origin works better in Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-Origin-works-best-on-Firefox I considered the filter list specific to CNAME-uncloaking. Effectively uBlock Origin Lite speeds up browser response compared to uBlock Origin. @K4sum1 I would like to recommend increasing the parallel downloading of the browser. I am trying 14. Edited June 3 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K4sum1 Posted June 3 Author Share Posted June 3 What exactly would parallel downloading do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 When you download a file, the browser with the parallel downloading feature enabled will divide the file into small packets and download those small packets simultaneously. Because of this, the download speed will increase. network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server The default value is (in my opinion) insufficient when compared to the downloading speed of a Chromium-based browser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 3 Share Posted June 3 (edited) Brave Url's tracking test is working again: https://fmarier.github.io/brave-testing/query-filter.html Although the test website (old) reports that you need to use private browsing it is recommended to use normal browsing. It is possible to verify that r3dfox passes some tests (without the need to use uBlock Origin or uBlock Origin lite),because it has partial blocking functionality of urls tracking parameters. In Chromium-based browsers (excluding Brave), however, the tests passed by r3dfox fail if only the browser is used. Edited June 3 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K4sum1 Posted June 5 Author Share Posted June 5 On Mon Jun 03 2024 (GMT+0000) at 6:44 AM, Sampei.Nihira said: When you download a file, the browser with the parallel downloading feature enabled will divide the file into small packets and download those small packets simultaneously. Because of this, the download speed will increase. network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server The default value is (in my opinion) insufficient when compared to the downloading speed of a Chromium-based browser. I meant to reply to this but I guess I forgot. I use HTTP Downloader if I want fast downloads, and with it I can see regressions even past 3 parallel connections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 5 Share Posted June 5 (edited) I understand. I see that only the installable software is up to date,not the extensions whose development is stopped at 2023. I have a mindset geared toward IT security. I never add third-party softwares for functionality that can be done natively by browsers because the increase of especially third-party code in the system statistically implies an increase that is directly proportional to the vulnerabilities. I also follow the same reasoning for extensions. I use as few extensions as possible. Edited June 5 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.b251015fc522288a9691c6db583793fd.jpg){kind=tracking}
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now