Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[alonivtsan]

Don't forget RequestPolicy Continued, which controls cross-site requests:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/requestpolicy-continued/

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

>I won't say that I don't trust them, its just that I like to understand what  
I apply.


each line is commented, so you just need to read it once to know what it  
does.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

>I am curious how you apply user.js in firefox esr 52

Copy the file in the relevant folder..?

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

I won't say that I don't trust them, its just that I like to understand what  
I apply. And looking at: https://github.com/pyllyukko/user.js/ I would need a  
lot of time to understand all that.


But noscript is worth to keep, thx for the input!

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

I am curious how you apply user.js in firefox esr 52

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

>user.js and firejail I think they are too much for my taste

I'm not sure what you mean by taste, but they are both 'set and forget'. It  
would take you half an hour to set it, even less to forget it. On the other  
hand the benefits last indefinitely.


cheers and push da limit o/

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

Umatrix is more complicated no doubt, but I think you should look up what  
noscript actually is.


Noscript has a crap ton of security protections, and moreover, it is usually  
a script blocker.


You should if nothing else, use it in that mode.

It really is a recommended security addon.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

Isn't umatrix the advanced version of noscript? Should be redundant if I make  
rules per site (uscript) and not globally (noscript)


Kind regards

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

Please use noscript, and if the blocking gets to be too much, put it in allow  
all globally dangerous scripts. You still get a fair amount of protection  
that way.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

Privacy possum is like privacy badger, but way better.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

Well looking into user.js and firejail I think they are too much for my  
taste, but keep pushing the limits :D


Thx and kind Regards.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

I wouldn't know what would you need but I can tell I only use these addons (I  
really think this is more than enough when set properly):

noscript
umatrix
httpseverywhere


I also use this user.js -> https://github.com/pyllyukko/user.js/

I also firejail and apparmor my browser.

https://firejail.wordpress.com/

cheers o/

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

Ok that was fast, ublock origin uses some kind of umatrix, but umatrix gives  
you more information.


Please tell me what do I need beside umatrix, which addons would work well  
with umatrix?


Currently I have:
uMatrix
HTTPS Everywhere
Privacy Badger

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

Damn and I just got comfortably with ublock origin custom filtering :D

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

I would like to grab the opportunity by the ballz and recommend umatrix ->  
https://github.com/gorhill/uMatrix/wiki

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[delilovic]

Well I am now taking a probably radical approach, will see how long it lasts:

I block everything in ublock origin and site by site I allow just what is  
needed to load the page... Sometimes I don't even commit (temporary allow).  
The thing that annoys me is that I have to every time allow connections to  
the same domain, cant find the filter option to automate this...

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[g . smyli]

'What is the difference between NoScript extension and disabling JavaScript  
in the Abrowser?'


A lot of web pages have links to javascripts running from more that one  
domain. With NoScript you can allow scripts by domain whereas the Abrowser no  
javascript setting is just that, no javascript.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoScript

NoScript also adds Anti-XSS protection, and Application Boundaries Enforcer  
(ABE) among other things.


One thing I have noticed, with it enabled, if you look at about:networking  
you will see that it links up with various IPs:

https://forums.informaction.com/viewtopic.php?f=7=20790
I guess it's all in the name if better security.

I edit my /etc/hosts file on a regular basis using
https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts
That list sends over 60,000 bad web sites to the bit bucket if my browser  
ever tries to link up with one. The /etc/hosts file answers DNS queries  
before they go out to nameservers and answers with an ip address of 0.0.0.0  
which goes nowhere.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

Yes, Ghostery is proprietary software.

The same way as WOT...

and this is no joke. alas.

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[greatgnu]

ghosterible is proprietary softverito :/

Re: [Trisquel-users] Abrowser recommended privacy/security extension

[calmstorm]

Noscript is a good one, Ublock origin and privacy possum are also really  
smart choices.


Ghostery is a really, really bad idea.