Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sampei.Nihira said:

Firefox will always be the safest browser compared to all other forks because it will always be the first firefox-based browser that patches bugs 0-day.

I personally hate hate hate this "thought pattern".  Sorry, I just hate it!

The very definition of 0-day is all about REACTION TIME.

If your surfing habits land on pages that could catch a 0-day and you don't already have other DEFENSES, THEN YOU ARE AT RISK OF CATCHING IT BEFORE FIREFOX RELEASES THE PATCH THAT YOU FALSELY SEE AS YOUR SAVING GRACE!

Firefox does not fix a 0-day within SECONDS of its discovery !!!  It takes DAYS at the bare minimum!  How many web sites did you visit in the span of those **DAYS**?

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I could not get Waterfox to launch.  I could get Waterfox Classic to launch and I'm NOT liking what I see there.

Regarding 0-day - DOES NOT CONCERN ME!  "Hype and Propaganda" in my book.  Blacklisting javascript and only whitelisting on a dozen cites you visit regularly TYPICALLY IS ENOUGH TO PREVENT ANY-AND-ALL ZERO-DAY BS!

 

image.thumb.png.252a5595d199fef6c79e46eb4f57a276.png

the version of waterfox i downloaded was ver 128 which is the same as normal firefox and i also checked and all telemetry server about:config settings where preconfigured to all be off already on install this is the website for the one im currently using https://www.waterfox.net/

Edited by legacyfan
Posted
51 minutes ago, legacyfan said:

the version of waterfox i downloaded was ver 128 which is the same as normal firefox and i also checked and all telemetry server about:config settings where preconfigured to all be off already on install this is the website for the one im currently using https://www.waterfox.net/

That's the version/source I tried also.  Will not launch in a Win10 x64 VM.  Did not track down "why".  May attempt again later in the week.

Show us a screencap of its about:networking page.  That will reveal any embedded telemetry.

My hunch is that if Waterfox Classic has embedded telemetry, than so does the non-classic version!

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

I personally hate hate hate this "thought pattern".  Sorry, I just hate it!

The very definition of 0-day is all about REACTION TIME.

If your surfing habits land on pages that could catch a 0-day and you don't already have other DEFENSES, THEN YOU ARE AT RISK OF CATCHING IT BEFORE FIREFOX RELEASES THE PATCH THAT YOU FALSELY SEE AS YOUR SAVING GRACE!

Firefox does not fix a 0-day within SECONDS of its discovery !!!  It takes DAYS at the bare minimum!  How many web sites did you visit in the span of those **DAYS**?

If the other Firefox-based forks are derived from Firefox,what I wrote is reality (whether you like it or not,I don't care).

I have never seen the various anti-exploits I have configured into action in the browsers I have used over the years.
But MY browsers will always be under the protective umbrella of my 13/14 anti-explois rules.

Other people's browsing habits are of no interest to me whatsoever.


I wish you a good day.

Edited by Sampei.Nihira
Posted

I agree, works for me.  Bear in mind that these "other forks" are even further behind as far as "zero-day".

Official Firefox may discover a zero-day on Monday and have it patched by Wednesday (that 3-day turn may be too optimistic!), but do any of us really think that the forks are patched as quickly?

I do not base by protection level on the assumption that a zero-day will be fixed "quickly".  My protective umbrella *WILL* protect me from that zero-day for WEEKS, if not MONTHS - as I suspect YOURS will also.  :cheerleader:

Posted
9 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

That's the version/source I tried also.  Will not launch in a Win10 x64 VM.  Did not track down "why".  May attempt again later in the week.

Show us a screencap of its about:networking page.  That will reveal any embedded telemetry.

My hunch is that if Waterfox Classic has embedded telemetry, than so does the non-classic version!

 

Capture.PNG

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

How come all browser discussions always end up being about privacy and security?

I realize this is MSFN and only way I'll be able to run this browser is by getting a new computer. The old one is at the very end as far as upgradability goes. So much for upgradability advantage of PCs compared to gaming consoles...

Posted
26 minutes ago, UCyborg said:

How come all browser discussions always end up being about privacy and security?

Appears that way, doesn't it, lol.

I would put three legs on that stool  --  Performance, Privacy, and Security (in that order for me).

I spent a big chunk of this morning comparing performance metrics (I have several "benchmarks", and as all here know, I want a quantitative measurement, not a "gut feeling" or a "placebo effect") between IceCat (based on Firefox 115 ESR) and Ungoogled v122.

IceCat "passes" my telemetry tests.  But "fails" (miserably!) on the PERFORMANCE side of things!  Between 14% and 26% SLOWER depending on which test is being used.

Posted

IceCat always forks strictly from ESR branch.

So they should be releasing a fork from Firefox 128 early next year or so.  I don't really track their release rate.  Only that we have some very strong "pro-Mozilla" users here at MSFN and I can not follow their lead.  I can support IceCat!

I've never directly compared Firefox 115 performance to Firefox 128 performance, so unsure if IceCat will "improve" or "worsen".

Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Only that we have some very strong "pro-Mozilla" users here at MSFN and I can not follow their lead.

Nah, this forum is full of Mozilla haters, MS haters, Google haters, NT 6.1+ haters etc. Or they might just be the most vocal. :P

Edited by UCyborg
Posted

Oh, no screencaps for evidence, but I did run some Firefox 115 versus Firefox 128 tests yesterday.  128 blows 115 out of the water!  Unsure why IceCat still uses 115.

Maybe they are intentionally one ESR version behind.  That's how I would do it, to be honest.  Too many nightly/daily/weekly updates to contend with otherwise.

I'll definitely NEVER support the ideology of having to update SO D#MN OFTEN.

Posted
17 hours ago, UCyborg said:

How come all browser discussions always end up being about privacy and security?

I realize this is MSFN and only way I'll be able to run this browser is by getting a new computer. The old one is at the very end as far as upgradability goes. So much for upgradability advantage of PCs compared to gaming consoles...

Privacy certainly.
An obsessive and in some respects paranoid privacy.

Security certainly not.
I have probably sometimes addressed this topic myself but always as a response to someone.
I really don't see security as an interesting topic for forum members.

Posted
3 hours ago, UCyborg said:

Sigh, in the old days, we were talking performance when it came to games, not web browsers.

I'd suggest that your world is too small, lol.

I run a lot of 3D CAD software and no game or web browser could ever compete with the brutal demands of 3D CAD.

There are some CAD programs that I intentionally only run in XP because the software intentionally disables screen rendering modes "not compatible" with XP.

Could also explain why our Mechanical Engineers have evolved into sloth-like creatures, because their computers have trained them to slow down in everything they do, lol.

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...