On 17/07/15 12:35 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 11:30:05 -0400, Daniel Micay wrote: >> The Tor browser is quite insecure. It's nearly the same thing as >> Firefox, so it falls near the bottom of the list when it comes to >> browser security, i.e. below even Internet Explorer, which has a basic >> sandbox (but not nearly on par with Chromium, especially on Linux) and >> other JIT / allocator hardening features not present at all in Firefox. >> What the Tor browser *does* have that's unique are tweaks to >> significantly reduce the browser's unique fingerprint. >> >> https://blog.torproject.org/blog/isec-partners-conducts-tor-browser-hardening-study >> >> Tor would be a fork of Chromium if they were starting again today with >> a large team. They don't have the resources to switch browsers. That >> would only change if they can get Google to implement most of the >> features they need. > > Vivaldi is based on Chromium. How does Vivaldi compare regarding > security and privacy to IceCat, Pale Moon, Firefox, QupZilla, Opera? > > https://aur4.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=vivaldi > https://aur.archlinux.org/packages/?O=0&K=vivaldi It's a proprietary browser built on Chromium. It's not interesting from a security / privacy perspective. If you want Chromium without Google integration then you can use Iridium. It doesn't remove any tracking / spying code though. There wasn't any to remove. Their redefinition of tracking just means support for any service hosted by Google (like adding a warning message when a dictionary would be downloaded from them). Most of what it does is changing the the default settings to be more privacy conscious. https://git.iridiumbrowser.de/cgit.cgi/iridium-browser/log/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
