Useful with any dark background theme, which makes default all-black icons nearly invisible, plus color-coding is nice. Icons' tweak for proxy-toggle addon, replacing black ones with green/red ones, depending on whether proxy is enabled/disabled (note - red=enabled). c = b'\x11\圎A\x78' to easily specify R,G,B channel values from a hexadecimal notation like #11EA78 instead. That will print mogrify-opts for rgb(17,234,120) color. Tabs will still momentarily flash white on opening though, which can be fixed by something like this in userContent.css: url-prefix(about:blank) 'įor c,v in zip('RGB', (round(n*c) for c in c)) )) Main purpose though is to just make new tabs non-white, as whoever thought that white screen is an acceptable default was (or is) probably blind (by now) :) I install user.js preset as vendor.js, so it'd be easy to diff or override via user.js as necessary, but if waterfox screws up loading that, it might not be immediately obvious, and same for LSM profiles, hence these simple checks in every new tab, where problem would be immediately obvious. Simple new-tab homepage with some non-eye-burning background image and JS checks for some parameters in arkenfox/user.js or similar must-have settings preset, as well as testing AppArmor or similar confinement (via nativeMessaging call). This won't work in official FF due to hardcoded mandatory extension signing.Īll *.local addon patches are usually just a bunch of overlay/replacement files, which can be used to replace ones in original. proxy-toggle.local - custom green/red icons for proxy-toggleīookmarklets.js: replace seldom-used Jcc with Jsel bookmarkletĪnd then installed by simply opening (Ctrl O) that file in waterfox. New-tab: replace file:// check with nativeMessaging, as former doesn't work since FF#1487353 Apple is in a perfect position to avoid or delay any feature creep, since it would prefer anything overly complex be done in native code, both for performance, and for the potential of getting a 15-30% revenue cut if the App Store is used (or required as on iOS).įurthermore, Apple is a large enough target that security researchers remain interested, and it has the resources to patch what those researchers discover.Īlso, WebKit already works with open source projects, we can even see links to Epiphany (AKA GNOME Web), WPE (embedded), and WebKitGTK on the official WebKit site’s download page: webkit.Http-version-icon: use diff icon colors to be easier to tell apart at a glanceīookmark-toolbar-hotkeys: print nicer message when bookmark url with that index is missingįlush-site-data: add pluginData cleanup, fix/clarify descriptionįorce-english-language: minor chrome.* -> browser.* fix So long as Apple maintains its not-invented-here mindset, WebKit can act as somewhat of a brake on the feature gluttony that we see now. … WebKit falls well behind its competition. I think security is definitely an important point that often gets glossed over when browser forks are brought up while still necessarily adding a patching delay, simpler modifications like Icecat or ungoogled-Chromium are (in theory) capable of staying safely fairly close to upstream by contrast, something like Palemoon/Goanna will require much more active development to stay secure, even if simply to review newly discovered vulnerabilities from Firefox/Gecko, and see which still apply to it.įrom the The reckless, infinite scope of web browsers post you linked I noticed this peculiar criticism: I use Firefox or Brave because they are mostly up-to-date and patch security vulnerabilities faster than downstream browsers like Waterfox or Palememe. Never heard of any Startpage controversies, especially since they’re based in EU (used to originally be called, the link redirects to ), where the EUSSR party rules over the internet companies with iron fist regulations, I doubt they can do shady stuff without us finding out about an insane fine or more.īut I’m not “stubborn” as to use unsecure browsers. Brave search is looking to have its own indexing db, which is good, but wouldn’t completely trust them either, neither do I completely trust DDG or startpage for that matter. Nothing to really worry about though, except the dependence on big tech maybe. DDG aggregates from more than just Bing, but I recall Bing being something insane like 80% of DDG results or something like that. If you search the same terms between Bing and DDG, if you look at images, they will be the same. Duckduckgo does the same with the most predominant search being Bing. You get google search results, without Google tracking you, just the pool of queries that startpage does for their users, which is basically useless to Google. It’s basically a proxy search engine for Google.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |