Anons, I think I've finally found a Botnet free browser that doesn't suck, bless you all...

Chromium cannot be "ungoogled". It was already discovered to be sending voice snippets to google, who knows what else is in there.

Cant fucking play videos on YouTube. It's garbage.

user, this browser plays YouTube videos just fine, and I've been doing that all morning, actual fucking retard

Source please?

Literally, installed it yesterday and it doesn't work.

>epiphany
>lags out the ass
literally garbage

that was for the chromium not the ungoogled meme

>playing YT in his browser

>>playing YT in his browser
What the fuck do you do then?

Play it through MPV retard

Ungoogled chromium exists and you being buttflustered about that doesn't change anything. Firefox is malware.

>"Icecat is lightyears ahead of Pale Moon"
>literally 3 minor changes in about:config

Attached: 100!.png (600x600, 812K)

>botnet free
>has a security risk so bad that it was removed from flathub months ago and still hasn't been added back

Ah yes, that shitty Safari port for Linucks

Back to instagram moron

who are you quoting

Attached: you and the joke.gif (640x480, 2.25M)

gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/epiphany

What's the best place to download chromium ungoogled?

reddit.com/

this site thats also linked on the official github (which you could've checked yourself) ungoogled-software.github.io/ungoogled-chromium-binaries/

I've been using waterfox for 2 days and already sick of it for numerous reasons. Gonna give Falkon a go.

Why does it make so many requests when starting with a blank page?

Netsurf still lacks a lot of functionality to work with the modern web.

It uses gstreamer for media playback. If you don't have the necessary plugins installed on your system then it won't work.

It's old, insecure and gay like your dad

Trying out Sphere rn, pretty confy.

But it's still Chromium based. Thought there is QtWebEngine code in it.

Attached: 1527364708595.jpg (500x333, 36K)

>generic chrome skin with no features

It's based on WebKit though.

How could you possibly be this retarded? Epiphany isn't based on Chromium in any way, it uses WebKit as it's backend, so in this way it's actually closer to being based on Safari, not that it's based on either though, it is its own thing

1/2

> Chrome is a relative newcomer to browser land, and it was designed from
> the start from a security point of view, so it got a headstart there.

In a browser, there are 2 main security components you want: The main security advantage is privsep. The other is W^X jit. Other security effects will follow from those design choices, especially if you have privsep. For instance, the chrome privsep is nicely refined and pledge enforcements could be added.

chrome was designed to be privsep. sshd was the first major privsep program on everyone's machine, and chrome was second. For instance, smtpd had it designed-in from the start, and it is very strong.

We have added privsep to software after the fact, but it isn't always a success. As an example of this, privsep was added to dhclient and probably isn't as strong. Only because it is difficult pasting the concept in afterwards.
chrome was designed to be privsep. sshd was the first major privsep program on everyone's machine, and chrome was second. For instance, smtpd had it designed-in from the start, and it is very strong.

We have added privsep to software after the fact, but it isn't always a success. As an example of this, privsep was added to dhclient and probably isn't as strong. Only because it is difficult pasting the concept in afterwards.

Attached: based_theo_on_browsers.jpg (1280x720, 43K)

2/2

> It's been my understanding that firefox is finally catching up. Namely,
> they've put a reasonably secure architecture in place. And they are getting
> rid of their old large extension language to try and use the same
> architecture as chrome.

It is my understanding that firefox says they are catching but, but all I see is lipstick on a pig. It now has multiple processes. That does not mean it has a well-designed privsep model. Landry's attempt to add pledge to firefox, shows that pretty much all processes need all pledges.

From where I stand, I think it fails to be privsep because the various process initializations still need way too much, and tasks aren't being done in the right process. I think firefox is still only 2 process classes, whereas chrome is 6 or 7.

> The gap is much smaller than it was a year ago.

I don't think so.

> In short, I feel that most of chrome's focus is on making things reasonably
> secure (as far as confidentiality and attacks go) so that people trust the
> browser, whereas firefox's focus is waaay more dispersed.

I doubt firefox will ever focus on security. The security mechanisms we are talking about require breaking compatibility or performance. This isn't the stuff one rearranges deck chairs for. BTW, the jit in chrome isn't W^X. So chrome is behind in one sense, because the jit in firefox is W^X [well not truly, it uses two mappings of the same object, and if the attacker can find the shadow he can play, but it is still raising the bar]

I'm replying becuase I think the picture is being painted too rosy. I think firefox is YEARS behind, unless they change their strategy.

source: marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=152872551609819&w=2

Full screen videos do not work with it. Meh

>furry browser

Here are some fun facts. Chrome uses setuid for sandboxing which is shit. Firefox uses an even shittier custom sandbox. As a result, the Epiphany flatpak has theoretically better security than Chrome and Firefox (for GNU distros).

Firefox is the least bad option and best choice rn unironically.

Holy fuck if Firefox or Chromium are our best choices in browserland then what the fuck. Might as well just commit sand ocean

but youtube recommendations are good, how I'm supposed to find new channels?

spyware.neocities.org/

r/whooooosh

>unironically linking this meme site
Kys

wrong image

Attached: surf.png (87x40, 240)

>It's old, insecure and gay like your dad
You're his dad?

Epiphany sucks ass though