Nonbotnet browser for passive botnets
Otter Browser is not a botnet
Pale Moon and Firefox both can be configured to not make a single connection to the internet when you only open local pages.
- NoScript context menus are confusing: is "Allow 8ch.net" - is that a status or an action?
- NoScript context menu icons are confusing: when scripts are Allowed, the icon is crossed over.
- NoScript is a "privacy addon" which by default opens its own homepage on every update, which still advertise fake pc tuner program.
It's amazing how the same person that will encourage Brave because of Tor tabs, despite the fact that its meagre security augmentations pale in comparison to properly-configured Firefox will discourage Tor because of sjw's.
spyware.neocities.org
Just use qutebrowser.
>>I make this thread because I discovered that palemoon's creators have been bribed by (((them))) to do a hardfork on firefox 52 and intentionally bug the program to not compile on arcitectures other then (((x86)))
On a RPi you can get PyQT5 and use pip.
As for passive botnet/script kiddy exploits how would firefox with
Running on a system patched against Spectre/Meltdown fair?
Preferably running inside as a serperate user, or better, inside a jail/container, or even better, inside a VM.
It would fair relatively well provided the version of Firefox being used has been patched for security vulnerabilities.
This is not privacy by default, this is placing financial sustainability security over privacy.
I'll agree that blocking NoScript is good, given the allegations against the NoScript devs bundling malware with other software, even if it is more a character assasination than an audit of NoScript. UMatrix was better at this task.