Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Web Browser 'Browzar' Branded Adware
DivineOmega writes "The recently released 'Browzar' web browser, based on the Internet Explorer core, is designed to protect a user's privacy whilst surfing the Internet and be an effective 'throw-away' browser. However many who deal with the removal of malware have flagged this software as malware. From the article: 'The application Browzar has been branded "adware" by many because it directs web searches to online adverts. Some technical experts also say Browzar, which claims to leave no trail of webpages visited, does not work. Browzar's developers say they are examining the feedback but strongly deny that it is adware.'"
they failed in their objectives pretty completely there...
I could go on to make jokes about an IE core, but that might be tacky (besides you'll have them in a moment anyway...)
*''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
Releasing a closed-source Windows-only IE-based browser that claims to do things already done by other browsers is a non-story, especially on Slashdot. The discovery that it's adware can only be addressed with a single-word response:
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
Let's look at a few things...
1) It uses IE.
2) It's a branded, closed source skin for IE that fails to do many of the claims that it makes
3) Instead of actually creating something, they have to adapt it to something that is KNOWN to have many serious issues that...
4) Allow malware/adware/spyware people to gain control of a browser to do their dirty work...
5) Came pretty much out of nowhere. Full release without known betas,
6) Doesn't work.
Anyone who has been online for a while probably has had an experience or two with IE browser skins. Most of my experiences have involved devious search bars, plugins and other "enhanced content" that effectively monitors, controls traffic and serves ads. Not surprised in the least.
If anyone claims to make a fully private and "secure" browser, while ignoring that you still have ISP and backbone logs, going through pipes and other servers that do their own logging... I'd have to, in my best technical opinion, call bullshit. Especially considering it still uses Internet Explorer as a rendering engine. (If that's indeed all it does.)
Posted anonymously because I don't need no steekin' karma.
And after a few years of use we will findout that "Blackbox" is a government project...
there is no issue with my network
Article summary:
The browser is like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife.
http://www.scroogle.org/cgi-bin/scraper.htm/
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
That reminds me of an article we had not too long ago here, dealing with the security of encryption schemes. This hits the same topic: How "secure" is what we consider secure?
The browser was advertized as a privacy ensuring tool. Now we learn it is exactly the opposite. Which one is true? What claims can you rely on? What review is actually independent and "true"?
The end result will probably be that the only thing you can actually trust (at least to a moderate extent) is open source software. For the simple reason that, even if you cannot verify its safety and privacy, peer review will work. Someone with the ability to read source will want to use it and thus review it, test it and determine its inner workings.
This of course requires you to trust the system you build it on, the compiler you build it with, the libraries used in the process and so on. A very lengthy rewiew process, but still it is more secure and profound than anything you can reach with software that you can, at best (and only until DRM disables it), throw into a disassembler to get at least a clue of its plans.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.