Slashdot Mirror
New Chrome Beta Adds Privacy Controls, Translation Option
billandad writes "Anyone would think the timing was deliberate; just as Microsoft is forced into giving users the option to switch from IE via the browser ballot screen, so Google introduces a new Chrome beta with enhanced privacy features to chisel away at Microsoft's market share. '... you can control how browser cookies, images, JavaScript, plug-ins, and pop-ups are handled on a site-by-site basis. For example, you can set up cookie rules to allow cookies specifically only for sites that you trust, and block cookies from untrusted sites.' The new beta also adds language detection, and will prompt the user to translate a page if it's written in a foreign tongue."
Okay - chromium can be made safe, but not Chrome. Chrome + Vbox machine + Wireshark = Proof of concept. Chrome talks to google servers no matter what settings you put them on. Good luck with privacy.
I'm a bit the same. On technical grounds, I'd like to use Chrome instead of the increasingly bloated Firefox, and given sufficient privacy and security safeguards I could live without the other plug-ins I use.
But Chrome comes from Google, and releases often with an auto-updating mechanism. Given both Google's form for being wildly off-target on privacy issues (Buzz, etc.) and the openly dismissive/arrogant attitude exhibited by some of their senior executives, I just don't trust them not to pull a fast one and start logging every page I visit, or sneaking in ads at the browser level, or something along those lines.
Perhaps this could theoretically be avoided by careful checking of the small print before each update, or adjusting certain settings so things don't happen automatically, but I don't want to have to do that sort of thing just to be able to update my web browser safely and make sure no-one's sneaked anything in. I'll just use another browser instead.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
That's the usual trick. The privacy settings conveniently ignore any such issue and only concentrate on the client side things like "private tab" or cookie handling. Of course, if you don't want to go completely white-list based (and most users don't), there's no way to explicitly block certain domains like google-analytics.com.
Of course it's convenient for Google to call only that privacy and completely ignore the fact that every Chrome installation has identifier about where you downloaded it, when you installed it, an unique identifier, everything you type to browser bar is sent to Google, any domain you visit is sent to Google, and so on...
I'll believe that IE9 is up to par with the other browsers when I see it; from what I have heard, they have no plans to add things like the video tag to IE9, so that's at least one thing that will not be up to par with the rest of the world. I have a friend who works at MS and he forwarded my complaints about the lack of the video tag and canvas tag, and the IE guys didn't even seem to have that on the agenda.
SSC
Video tag is such a mess currently that I'm not surprised if they didn't spend much of their energy on it. Also, if they did, it means they'll side with Apple and Google to H.264's side. This leaves Firefox and Opera alone with Theora. It's not that IE9 isn't up to par with video tag support, it's that video tag itself is far from ready. We will still be using Flash for a long time.
If I remember correctly, they do have canvas support and improved javascript performance though, and most importantly, they're going for standards compliance.
Look at SRWare Iron - Chrome without the Google tie-in
Edit: There is an HORRIFIC flash slide-in advertisement in their site. Easy to close, innocuous content, but it appears on Every. Single. Page. I just decided not to update my version of Iron.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
You haven't read all the source code of Firefox I suppose?
They haven't even implemented simple things such as a bookmark manager or extensions on a Mac yet. It has a looong way to go.
Extensions work on the Mac beta version. I don't use bookmarks, so can't comment on that.
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Iron is basically a scam by some guy who bashes Google to drive more traffic to his Google Ads. Don't encourage an asshole by using his browser.
(And why on earth would you trust some random guy on the internet in the first place?)
Within Chrome. Of course you can use some 3rd party apps, but that's not an excuse not to have it.
Also just FYI, Ad blockers on Chrome don't stop the http requests being made, they just hide ads. It's useless for blocking data gathering services because your info is still being sent.
Iron was created by a person who's admitted that he's spreading FUD about Google just to drive traffic to his site so he can make money off his ads. Is that the kind of project you want to cheer for?