Matters of principle can't be accused to be paranoia.
Originally Posted by allenmaher
Firefox and cookieless tracking
You do have to futz with it a bit. You really need to use Panopticlick for this purpose, as they have a pretty good set of browser fingerprinting software to test against. Look at the data they return, and look for unusual values. Avoid using versions of Firefox that are too new or too old. Firefox 11 and earlier (Like Torbrowser uses) report their actual window size as the screen resolution. This will ALWAYS be unique except for the default opening size, so NEVER resize that window in Torbrowser! Later versions report total available screen resolution of only the monitor Firefox is on, use a common resolution only.
Originally Posted by wargames
Do NOT install any uncommon fonts, and be sure to have all the usual ones installed. Most Ubuntu installs of any particular version all have the same fonts installed. Also, consider copying the user-agent from Torbrowser and setting Firefox in about:config to report it, you will strip out some identifying information, in my case enough to make the difference. This is it, it claims to be Windows.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0
Although Windows with a Totem video player is a giveaway that you use some form of Linux, so many people spoof useragents that that does not make my normal Firefox browser come up as unique. Standard I concern myself with is "enough for a search warrant."
When it counts, use Torbrowser! You block anyone from logging your IP address, as well as coming up very common in Panopticlic due to anti-fingerprinting precautions taken by the Tor folks in setting up their custom version of Firefox. Mine comes up as one out of 9,180 with
One last thing I always do is this: I copy my .mozilla directory into a ramdisk by a script and run from it. Same script cleans out the .macromedia flash cookie directory on closing. This way nobody can set a "supercookie" that won't be cleaned out on closing the browser and deleting it's directory from ram. In Torbrowser, which runs from it's own folder, no script is needed to do this, just drop a copy of the whole folder into /tmp and run from there.
When you find one such anti-feature enabled by default, it makes you ask, what else is enabled by default.
Originally Posted by tancrackers
Take a minute or two to browse your phone or tablet over to ANY website that is render heavy. Watch chrome fall flat on its face and peg your CPU. Watch chrome become totally unresponsive. Watch chrome do the chunky scroll. Now try the same site on Firefox, watch it run fluid, smooth, and responsive. Chrom[e/ium] is absolutely trash on mobile. The only reason it is even marginally acceptable on desktop systems is because you have so much processing power than you don't notice just how horrible it actually is.
Originally Posted by smitty3268
Originally Posted by RealNC
It uses Google services and servers for many jobs. They collect your data.
All server records are subject to subpeona
All server records are subject to subpeona! That means when you use computers for activities you want to deny the courts access to, you must take precautions against being tracked. Why do you think Tor exists? OK, I will give an example. Suppose someone makes a post a certain activist news site at which I am an editor, during a Republican Convention, and Secret Service doesn't like it. We don't log IP addresses, so prior raids to seize servers got nothing. With no third party embeds on the site, you can't back door IP log us by going to Youtube or Facebook. Now suppose someone uses Chromium and forgets to turn off the "search assistant" and similar items. Again, a subpeona to Google for all partial typings of our URL would get a list of about 2% all posters who used Chome or its varients. That's what Google logs. If you were on that list-and your typing matched the timestamp of the offending article, you might get cops with machine guns raiding your house. This happens in my scene, so it's not tinfoil hattery to take active measures to block it. This is why some activist news sites now recommend only the "tails" Tor-based live distro for high-security work. 2% doesn't sound like much, but statistically a 2% chance of 10 years in prison is an expeectation of 72 days behind bars!
Originally Posted by allenmaher
I still have the Eeepc 701 (with 2g of ram) which happens to use the Pentium M, a variant of p3 (running @630Mhz), with Xubuntu 12.04 and guess what browser... Firefox. It's not particularly slow, specially because of Adblock/Noscript/Ghostery.
Originally Posted by Ericg
It helped me recently to browse forums and get info to recover an unrelated bios upgrade near disaster of my desktop machine. Never trust Asus (don't update when it works), their ezflash is crap (downgrades are blocked!) it was flashrom and linux who rescued it.
This is so true, but there are a couple of factors that come into play here including screen size and resolution: the larger the screen and the higher the res, the more noticeable chrome's haggishness becomes. For this reason I can only use FF on my Tegra 2 tablet. Strangely orientation makes a difference too: scrolling is less choppy in landscape orientation. The latest Chrome beta for Android has gotten better than just a few months ago in this respect, but still terrible compared to FF for Android.
Originally Posted by droidhacker
Agreed. Firefox mobile is pretty much the best Android browser there is, for the last year or so.