Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] DDG shows privacy leaks
This is the reason why Abrowser and IceCat should adopt DuckDuckGo (non-JS Lite SSL) (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/duckduckgo-lite/) as the default DDG OpenSearch engine. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Consider to mention GNUzilla IceCat in Help - About
-- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] free add-on ublock origin not listed on addons page for icecat
Apparently its approved, even if the non-free filter have not been resolved. Who approved it? -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Please add (based on Mozilla Firefox ESR 31.8.0) in About
To make it crytsal clear, please add ***(based on Mozilla Firefox ESR 31.8.0)* in Help - About box like this: IceCat 31.8.0 *(based on Mozilla Firefox ESR 31.8.0)* This should be done for Abrowser as well. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Proposed project: IceCat Developer Edtion
Firefox Developer Edition brings your core dev tools together with some powerful new ones that will extend your ability to work across multiple platforms from one place. It’s everything you’re used to, only better. And only from Firefox. - From https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/developer/ Would IceCat Developer Edtion be an interesting concept to start working on? Please leave feedback. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Windows 8.1 Icecat Bug Report
On 2015-07-12 20:19, Narcis Garcia wrote: I'm trying to install icecat on Windows 8.1 WHY ?! Narcis, please try to avoid judging non-GNU/Linux users. He might very well stop updating this bug issue now and that would be a loss for the Windows compatible version of GNU IceCat. Let me know if I misunderstood your intention. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] URGENT: Development advice for IceCat 38
Can you please ask the Firefox developers about this? -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Logjam in Icecat
I just approvedDisable DHE (https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Disable_DHE) as this add-on is very important to keep GNU IceCat secure as the version are far below 39.0. Please leave feedback. Thank you for reminding me Vajniy. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Logjam in Icecat
yes, AFAIK. You can prevent the logjam attack by installing https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/disable-dhe/ On 2015-06-24 13:08, алексей важный wrote: Hello! As i know latest icecat is based on firefox 31.7, where logjam ssl vulnerability is not fixed. So, is icecat vulnerable? with regards, Alexei. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] IceCat 31.7.0 Trisquel package, when?
When will it be in the repository for Trisquel? -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Consider rename IceCat to Icecat
In favor to imitate the title style of Firefox (not FireFox), should not IceCat be spelled Icecat? Currently we have Icedove (not IceDove), I think the big C in IceCat might lead to confusion. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Javascript error in icecat, works fine with firefox: TypeError: xxx is not a function
Don't you get the error with the Firefox ESR version that your IceCat is based on (ie GNU IceCat 31.6.0 is based on Firefox ESR 31.6.0)? -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Switching interface language in about:config crashed IceCat
A Firefox maintainer answered: I don't think we can do anything about this in the Firefox side. You need to bring this up to the maintainers of IceCat and its language packs first. If there's a problem that needs to be fixed on our side, they should be able to identify it and file a more specific bug, or submit a patch. - https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1148841#c1 -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] YouTube HTML5 Video Player
Is YouTube's integrated YouTube HTML5 Video Player proprietary? Where can I find the license for it? I don't find the license in https://www.youtube.com/html5. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Third-party repository page enabled
I enabled https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/GNU_IceCat_add-on_third-party_repositories Feel free to unapprove it if there's reasons to do it. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] DuckDuckNo
DDG is apparently hosted by Verizon, a company guarded by the NSA - http://etherrag.blogspot.se/2013/07/duck-duck-go-illusion-of-privacy.html -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] GNU.org privacy list added in uBlock Origin 0.9.4.4
This will make it easy to migrate from SpyBlock to uBlock for the IceCat maintainer Rubén Rodríguez. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Important: SpyBlock Filter Preferences missing Allow some non-intrusive advertising
This is what I found in the AdBlock Plus Filter Preferences main window at the bottom: [checkbox] Allow some non-intrusive advertising [link] View list - https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/exceptionrules.txt [link] Read more - https://adblockplus.org/en/acceptable-ads SpyBlock focus on privacy rather than ad blocking. The Allow some non-intrusive advertising checkbox is missing in SpyBlock 2.6.3.0 (part of IceCat 31.6.0). This affect a lot of websites. Can you please add it Rubén? -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Important: SpyBlock Filter Preferences missing Allow some non-intrusive advertising
SpyBlock does not have to add this feature if you wish to follow the same design pattern as uBlock: The uBlock project does not support Adblock Plus' Acceptable Ads Manifesto, because the Acceptable Ads marketing campaign is really the business plan of a for-profit entity. uBlock's purpose is not to cater to the business plan of for-profit entities. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Flash titled add-ons
There are lots, and lots, of free add-ons with proprietary formats in their title names. Some of the most popular includes: * Flash Video Downloader * Download Flash and Video * YouTube Flash Player Should we boycott Flash titled add-ons from directory.fsf.org? I'm currently revising https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:IceCat_extensions_%28proposed%29 for the third month now. This step is important to determine IceCat candidates for the new repository. Any feedback are welcome. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Source of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?
Source should be included as it is misunderstood that this filter is not unique in https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/issues/1301 for example. On 2015-04-22 20:25, David Englund/Hedlund wrote: On 2015-04-22 15:43, Rubén Rodríguez wrote: El mar, 21-04-2015 a las 07:46 +0200, David Englund/Hedlund escribió: Does anyone know where http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt is generated from? http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/retriever/ -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org Great. Can you please add this at the beginning of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?: ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easyprivacy.txt ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/fanboy-social.txt Its so confusing to not know where they come from. I develop filters for EasyList. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Source of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?
EasyList, EasyPrivacy, and Fanboy Social should be included in the SpyBlock filter name too. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] SpyBlock incompatible with Element Hiding Helper for Adblock Plus
I filed this issue in https://github.com/chrisaljoudi/uBlock/issues/1304 -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Source of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?
On 2015-04-22 15:43, Rubén Rodríguez wrote: El mar, 21-04-2015 a las 07:46 +0200, David Englund/Hedlund escribió: Does anyone know where http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt is generated from? http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/retriever/ -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org Great. Can you please add this at the beginning of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?: ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easylist.txt ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/easyprivacy.txt ! Source: https://easylist-downloads.adblockplus.org/fanboy-social.txt Its so confusing to not know where they come from. I develop filters for EasyList. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] SpyBlock subscription page needed
Can you please add these links in a file name http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/subscribe.html ul lia href=abp:subscribe?location=http%3A%2F%2Fgnuzilla.gnu.org%2Ffilters%2Fblacklist.txttitle=Block%2Ball%2Bwell%2Bknown%2Bprivacy%2BtrackersBlock all well known privacy trackers/a/li lia href=abp:subscribe?location=http%3A%2F%2Fgnuzilla.gnu.org%2Ffilters%2Fthird-party.txttitle=Block%2Ball%2Bthird%2Bparty%2Bresources%2Bwhen%2Bin%2Bprivate%2BbrowsingBlock all third party resources when in private browsing/a/li lia href=abp:subscribe?location=http%3A%2F%2Fgnuzilla.gnu.org%2Ffilters%2Fjavascript.txttitle=Block%2Bjavascript%2Bdata%2Brequests%2Bwhen%2Bin%2Bprivate%2BbrowsingBlock javascript data requests when in private browsing/a/li /ul They are useful if uBlock, and Adblock Plus developers want to implement subscriptions for subscriptions in private mode. They can use it as a test page. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Source of http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt ?
Does anyone know where http://gnuzilla.gnu.org/filters/blacklist.txt is generated from? I find it hard that those 18000 lines have been written from scratch specifically for IceCat but I might be wrong. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] New repository: Free add-ons with 100, 000+ Average Daily Users
Free add-ons with 100,000+ Average Daily Users: Proposed GNUzilla IceCat (the GNU version of Mozilla Firefox) add-ons set for collaboration between Free Software Foundation (FSF) Licensing Compliance Lab and the Mozilla Foundation. - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/collections/DavidHedlund/free/ This repository is synchronized with Free Software Directory:IceCat extensions (proposed): https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:IceCat_extensions_%28proposed%29 -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] Introducing Extension Signing: A Safer Add-on Experience
Read all 19 pages in https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/02/10/extension-signing-safer-experience/ : This year will bring big changes for add-on development, changes that we believe are essential to safety and performance, but will require most add-ons to be updated to support them. I’ll start with extension signing, which will ship earlier, and cover other changes in an upcoming post. The Mozilla add-ons platform has traditionally been very open to developers. Not only are extensions capable of changing Firefox in radical and innovative ways, but developers are entirely free to distribute them on their own sites, not necessarily through AMO https://addons.mozilla.org/, Mozilla’s add-ons site. This gives developers great power and flexibility, but it also gives bad actors too much freedom to take advantage of our users. Extensions that change the homepage and search settings without user consent have become very common, just like extensions that inject advertisements into Web pages or even inject malicious scripts into social media sites. To combat this, we created a set of add-on guidelines https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Add-on_guidelines all add-on makers must follow, and we have been enforcing them via blocklisting (remote disabling of misbehaving extensions). However, extensions that violate these guidelines are distributed almost exclusively outside of AMO and tracking them all down has become increasingly impractical. Furthermore, malicious developers have devised ways to make their extensions harder to discover and harder to blocklist, making our jobs more difficult. We’re responsible for our add-ons ecosystem and we can’t sit idle as our users suffer due to bad add-ons. An easy solution would be to force all developers to distribute their extensions through AMO, like what Google does for Chrome extensions. However, we believe that forcing all installs through our distribution channel is an unnecessary constraint. To keep this balance, we have come up with extension signing, which will give us better oversight on the add-ons ecosystem while not forcing AMO to be the only add-on distribution channel. Here’s how it will work: * Extensions that are submitted for hosting on AMO and pass review will be automatically signed. We will also automatically sign the latest reviewed version of all currently listed extensions. * Extension files that aren’t hosted on AMO will have to be submitted to AMO for signing. Developers will need to create accounts and a listing for their extension, which will not be public. These files will go through an automated review process and sent back signed if all checks pass. If an add-on doesn’t pass the automated tests, the developer will have the option to request the add-on to be manually checked by our review team. A full review option will also be available for non-AMO add-ons, explained further ahead. * For extensions that will never be publicly distributed and will never leave an internal network, there will be a third option. We’ll have more details available on this in the near future. * There will be a transition period of two release cycles (12 weeks total) during which unsigned extensions will only generate a warning in Firefox. * After the transition period, it will not be possible to install unsigned extensions in Release or Beta versions of Firefox. There won’t be any preferences or command line options to disable this. * Installation of unsigned extensions will still be possible on Nightly and Developer Edition, as well as special, unbranded builds of Release and Beta that will be available mainly for developers testing their extensions. All Firefox extensions are affected by this change, including extensions built with the Add-ons SDK. Other add-on types https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons/Install_Manifests#type like themes and dictionaries will not require signing and continue to install and work normally. Signature verification will be limited to Firefox, and there are no plans to implement this in Thunderbird or SeaMonkey at the moment. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Introducing Extension Signing: A Safer Add-on Experience
On 2015-03-30 05:23, Svetlana A. Tkachenko wrote: https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2015/02/10/extension-signing-safer-experience/ Such signing requirement doesn't let the user run a modified copy of an extension on their own computer, until the user figures out how to disable it. IceCat folks would probably just disable the signing requirement by default. Svetlana -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org My understanding is that Firefox just will tell the user that an add-on that is going to be installed is either signed or not signed. But I have not read the article. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] IceCat in a BitBox?
On 2015-03-29 07:21, David Englund/Hedlund wrote: From http://www.pcworld.com/article/227838/free_browser_in_a_box_runs_firefox4_with_ultra_security.html Security is an oft-debated topic in the ongoing browser wars http://www.pcworld.com/article/222948/firefox_4_nears_6_million_downloads_as_browser_wars_heat_up.html, but there's no denying that malware is a common problem for all of the leading contenders. A new solution launched this week by German Sirrix AG http://www.sirrix.de/, however, uses Firefox 4 http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/223079/why_firefox_4_is_winning_the_browser_battle.html, Linux and virtualization to create what it calls a browser in a box that keeps all malware isolated and out of the user's main operating system. Originally created at the request of the German federal government, BitBox http://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?hl=enie=UTF8prev=_trurl=translate.google.comsl=detl=entwu=1u=http://www.sirrix.de/content/pages/57064.htmusg=ALkJrhhqiyXXi4jGbq0RUPMHqfi348qrog (short for browser in the box) runs on Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 as well as Debian Linux, Ubuntu http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/226530/ubuntu_1104_natty_narwhal_makes_splashy_debut.html, OpenSUSE and Gentoo, allowing users to surf the Web worry-free, Sirrix says. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org The name would obvious be IceBox for IceCat. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] bug-ice...@gnu.org mailing list request
Why are there no IceCat specific mailing list? GNUzilla and IceCat are separate projects. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
[Bug-gnuzilla] better_default.xpi collection
A better_default.xpi file composed of multiple add-ons like librejs, html5-everywhere, can be made with CLEO. Such file can be asked to be downloaded and installed automatically the first time IceCat opens. If we implemented this feature we could without any problems remove these add-ons as part of IceCat and leave it to the opinion of the user. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] better_default.xpi collection
Refer to https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Collection:IceCat_extension_working_lists#better-defaults.xpi_collection for add-ons that are part of icecat 31.5.0 that can be installed from better-defaults.xpi in future versions of IceCat if they get removed. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] No Flash - Proposed being part of IceCat
On 2015-03-21 23:54, Ivan Zaigralin wrote: IMHO, we should be removing some (or may be even all) addons from the default icecat install, not adding more. I really like the fact that upon the first run, icecat prompts the user to check/uncheck the privacy features, and I am very happy about LibreJS being labeled as /experimental/ (/ineffective/ would be closer to the mark). This actually makes the whole practice somewhat palatable, and now I just wish none of the privacy addons were on by default. Surely a user can check a few boxes? Also, SpyBlock should probably be described better here (that it blocks ads, etc.) Also, video addon should probably be added to that checkbox list. On 03/21/2015 01:29 PM, David Englund wrote: *HTML5 Video Everywhere!**Note:* Some legacy sites force using Flash player, you will need to install no-flash134 https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/no-flash/ add-on to support them. - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/html5-video-everywhere/ I strongly propose thatNo Flash (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/no-flash/) should be part of future versions of IceCat. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org This is a very good idea. I have changed my mind now and think that IceCat should be clean (as in Emacs clean). -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] better_default.xpi collection
Now it make sense again to distribute SpyBlock as a separate add-on. -- http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
