Supermium

[NotHereToPlayGames]

Without some sort of PROOF, this shall be considered "fearmongering".

[Karla Sleutel]

2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Without some sort of PROOF, this shall be considered "fearmongering".

I shan't, can't give the links publicly without the violating of the forum rules because Russian forums contain cracked Western software, nevertheless, I can share with our dear admins via the messages.

In the meantime, what do you suggest, ecaxtly? 

Probaly could make your own investigation?

[Karla Sleutel]

Screenshot. One of many, 

[Karla Sleutel]

Forgot to attach the translation. Several members, including this one, contradict one member that tells "no passwords and their hashes are transmitted".

Another "silver" (high rep.) member gives a link to his investigation and writes "Don't make such categorical statements. I observed this activity (stealing passwords) many times."

[NotHereToPlayGames]

You made/forwarded/cited this so-called claim.  The burden is on you to prove it.  Citing two people arguing in Russian is no proof of anything.

If you can't prove it, it doesn't exist.  But technically, I AGREE WITH YOU.

No skin off my back either way.  Supermium couldn't log into my bank.  But yeah, I did try, and yeah, I *immediately* changed my bank password after the failed login attempt.

 

Supermium (and all Chrome forks above version 79 [December 2019]) have password data breach "protection".

Personally, if you "trust these", you only INVITE man-in-the-middle and you VOLUNTEERED for your password hash to be TRANSMITTED !!!

You REQUESTED it be analyzed via THIRD-PARTY to see if it exists in the wild.  You ASKED for that when you opted in for the "protection".

This is no different than VOLUNTEERING your local files to be SUBMITTED to antivirus firms if you allow them to be scanned by antivirus software.

 

Technically, I AGREE WITH YOU, there *ARE* settings in Supermium (and all Chrome versions since 2019 !!!) that transmit data that I **OPT OUT OF**.

But for the enduser that does "trust" the 'service', I leave that up to them to decide on their own, I would suggest they disable these "settings".

But there will be just as many that claim they are "safer" having some embedded Chrome "service" acting as their "nanny" to protect themselves from themself.

 

 

 

Edited January 8 by NotHereToPlayGames

[Karla Sleutel]

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

You made/forwarded/cited this so-called claim.  The burden is on you to prove it. 

No, I made a request, suggestion to the admins to check it. Read carefully what I write. Nothing is "on me".

 

1 hour ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

Technically, I AGREE WITH YOU, there *ARE* settings in Supermium (and all Chrome versions since 2019 !!!) that transmit data that I **OPT OUT OF**.

That is indeed right!!! But Supermium pretends to be Ungoogled, and Russians wrote that it exists in Ungoogled Supermium! Which can't be since the real Ungoogled  has it OFF by default.

So it's a lie by Supermium. No proof meeded in this case. Check the flags.

[Karla Sleutel]

2 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said:

"Don't make such categorical statements".  If you can't prove it, it doesn't exist.

On the contrary, It was said to the user that didn't think Supermium was stealing passwords.

You again read wrong. That's why the bold text is now used.

[NotHereToPlayGames]

I would have to investigate further.

ie, Supermium can be keeping the setting in the GUI but that doesn't technically mean that the setting "works".

Doesn't really interest me further at this point.  Not at v138 at least.  Who knows about future releases.

[Karla Sleutel]

I'll leave it like this until it's fully investigayed by a trusted party, which is @Dave-H in this case.

The suggestion is to open up the default browser, not changed settings at all. Then try to save fake paswords or login to somewhere unimportant, see what IPs it knocks onto. 

[NotHereToPlayGames]

5 minutes ago, Karla Sleutel said:

On the contrary, It was said to the user that didn't think Supermium was stealing passwords.

You again read wrong. That's why the bold text is now used.

Nah, not really.  Just typed too fast.  I edited my post but you read it before my edit went through.

Regardless, the bottom line here is that Supermium users only have themselves to blame if they are "opting IN" on these 'protection services'.

[Karla Sleutel]

Everyone, sorry for all the typos, it's a dry winter here, in Canada at my location. Caught dry eyes.

[waltah]

I installed Supermium, Version 138.0.7204.298 (Official Build) (32-bit) on win XP SP3 on Dell Dimension 4700 this AM.  All seemed well -- it rendered even a brand new site that MyPal shows as garbage --until I entered an incorrect address and Windows Defender stepped in to protect me.

WD?  Where'd that come from?  I thought it was part of Win 11.  One reason I run only obsolete systems is to get away from the Microsoft nanny state.  It's continued presence would be a deal breaker as far as daily use is concerned.  So:

1.  Where did this come from?  Is it really part of Supremium? 

2. Is there a way to turn it off?  I looked at lots of options but ... way too much to comprehend and nothing labeled as 'Windows Defender.'

Thanks for any help!

Edited January 8 by waltah
Revise issue

[NotHereToPlayGames]

<copied from a Google search>

Windows Defender was first introduced as a downloadable anti-spyware tool for Windows XP (Service Pack 2) and Windows Server 2003, then became a built-in feature starting with Windows Vista, evolving into a full antivirus suite with Windows 8, and is now part of the integrated Windows Security in Windows 10/11.

</copy>

 

If you allow/enable "Windows Updates", then it can add Windows Defender.

I always disabled Windows Updates when I ran XP x64 so I am unsure if Windows Defender would have been installed via that route.

Edited January 8 by NotHereToPlayGames

[user57]

considering the situation a build in User Agent changer would be an option, there might be some already around 

but if supermium run out of upgrades it would be better to have it now, instead later on in just not having it

[waltah]

Been running Supermium Version 138.0.7204.298 (Official Build) (32-bit) on win XP SP3 on Dell Dimension 4700 3.5 Gb for a week; pretty much 'box stock,' ungoogled.  It's all but flawless.  I've run most of (all?) the popular browsers for XP at one time or another in the last few years; this is the only one that will reach every site and renders all of them useably.  

I no longer have trouble with Cloudflare even though my ISP is considered a red light district.  I don't do banking online.  

I have AdBlocker Ultimate and UblockOrigin installed.  

Performance is perfectly adequate; even the one YouTube I tried was okay.   The Mars landscape photo jerked at about 1/4-1/2 second intervals when panned.   GeForce GTX 645 card.  Twitch and British Gas sites looked okay to me.  

The 'don't autostart videos' setting does indeed work only sometimes.   It takes ten tasks running to see one tab which is -WOW!- but probably makes for better use of limited memory.  

Overall a stunning piece of work!

Three questions/issues:

1. Is there a way to set Luxxle as default browser?  As far as I can tell the default browser must be chosen from a very short built-in list.

2. Is there a way to set a URL that opens in each new tab?   Even AI flails on trying to answer this question.  

3. My eyes are not the best and the three icons at the upper right corner are basically just a gray blur.  Either whte on a dark backbround or black on a lighter background would be fine but I cannot find a way to get either one.   Or extending the mouseover color change of the 'X' icon would also work.  But the other two get lighter which is no help at all 

No other browser I've used had any of those three issues so it's surprising to see them here.  But still a fantastic piece of work.  

Any help appreciated!