Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 32 Arrives With New HTTP Cache, Public Key Pinning Support
An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla today officially launched Firefox 32 for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android. Additions include a new HTTP cache for improved performance, public key pinning support, and easy language switching on Android. The Android version is trickling out slowly on Google Play. Changelogs are here: desktop and mobile.
Firefox, bagel and lox
Breakfast of champions handy
And aftershave that makes men brave
When over Macho Grande
Burma Shave
Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
This ran a day or two ago, yesterday, or day before.
Will the next version be Firefox64 ?
When will we go back to Firefox ONE ?
I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more, by doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too(4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
Just installed the latest Firefox and did a bit of random surfing. First impression: noticeably faster than before, probably even on par with Chrome.
No plugins or extensions installed, ONE WEBPAGE WITHOUT FLASH goes from 96MB up to 500+ MB.
The page has maybe ONE FUCKING PARAGRAPH OF TEXT, ONLY.
Firefox is gone from my system, now.
Totally fucking useless browser. Mozilla went to shit the second they started with this every six weeks update cycle.
FireFox 4, with add-ons, runs faster than this new version with NOTHING added, on a 64-bit dual core system and 2GB RAM.
Quit supporting Mozilla, people. It's become quite obvious they don't have a clue what they're doing and these rapid version increments are just to make them look like they actually care about you, while they push out an entirely inferior product compared to what they used to offer.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
about cruddy old FireFox weekly reports?
PlanetVulkan.com
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
As well as safer + more reliable, by using this (you already have it too) http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
I don't know what you're talking about. Multiple tabs open and I have less than 500MB of used memory.
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more, by doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
Firefox memory usage is the worst of any browser. I use it as my secondary browser, when I have to, and then I close it out.
'You see, even of the warring study. [rice.edu] getting together to dicks produced On baby...don't go find something people playing can say I'm packing Of progress. the developer Megs of ram runs is ingesting Themselves to be a population as weel hanD...don't declined in market move any equipment faster than this or chair, return as the premiere to keep up as of OpenBSD versus Contact to see if one or the other BSD culminated in sanctions, and charnel house. The to stick something [nero-online.org].
This stuff looks interesting. I can't wait until they fold it into Palemoon.
Because coolness of the technology aside, everything else about Firefox is increasingly pissing me off.
Now that postion:sticky has come out from hiding behind a pref in Firefox 32, it's a "nice to have" CSS feature on webpages that scroll a lot so you can still see the heading of what you're looking at. Safari supports it behind a -webkit- prefix but for some reason Chrome and Opera have no support for it in Blink yet.
Good luck with that.
I post in EVERY Slashdot firefox article, whining for the same thing.
LESS focus on UI / features, MORE focus on stability / performance.
I've been using FireFox since the name it had before FireFox (I've forgotten it) - I think I used it since version 1 or god knows what.
For about the last 12 months, maybe 18, Firefox has become completely unstable for "extreme" browsers like me. I run anywhere from 30 to 150 tabs open at a time. I'd say a nice average would be around 60 tabs. When I'm researching something (often multiple things) I like to google what I'm reading, middle click open in the background the first 5 results. Then when on a forum, I'll middle click open 5 more results and so on. I like having those tabs queued up in the background for me to read.
You might think "well there's the cause of your stability problem!!" except this never used to happen. 18 months ago you could hit 200 tabs without FF crashing. Now, I'm scared to open more than 60. This is across multiple machines too.
I've even tried switching to WaterFox, no dice - I'm still able to crash FF regularly and I run very few addons either.
It's good to see the http cache changes, so they are working on performance but stability should be the #1 focus.
Oddly enough, I get exactly the same symptoms in Firefox for Android as I do Windows for fucks sake. If I hit enough tabs (about 8 on my Galaxy S3) - FF for Android shits the bed, presumably because it's out of ram and can't page well or something. Worst part is FF for Android doesn't remember my open tabs either. Miserable.
They've fiddled and fucked with the UI, replicating Chrome as much as they can (ugh!) for years, now can they stop? If I wanted ugly goddamn chrome I'd install it.
PLEASE fix the stability, PLEASE make it faster. I don't care how much ram it uses, I just want a modern experience with my browser.
Since these updates became more about upping the version number than adding anything really useful and substantive, they should seize this golden opportunity to call it Firefox 100000. Then as the updates roll on from here ...Firefox 100001, Firefox 100010, Firefox 100011, etc.
Firefox mobile: Android 2.2 and ARMv6 processor chipset no longer supported
Youtube Videos still continue to play even when the tab is closed. The video stops rendering sometimes yet the audio continues. The browser itself freezes a lot. I get 'firefox is running but not responding' messages all the time. I don't see the fuss. It's bloated crap IMO
The "new" DownloadStatusBar addon which worked around the changes in (I think) FF29... well, it's broken again. Probably I can go Googling and find an update somewhere.
"Oh no... he found the
From release notes:
"NEW - Easier back, forward, reload, and bookmarking through the context menu"
http://msujaws.wordpress.com/2014/05/27/experimenting-with-context-menus/
If only Mozilla Firefox guys could just stop endlessly fucking around with all the little things that work fine! You guys want to fix broken shit? Okay great! More of that is needed. You want to add stupid new (typically broken) features/API/kitchen sink to the browser?? Okay, not really great, but it's to be expected, and there is typically a way to disable the new shit (if there is no way to disable new stuff at all, then that's another entire rant). Those types of updates are all well and good but here's an example of just plain completely retarded! Right click popup menu for web browsers has been a solved problem for how many years now, yet here goes UI guys going to fuck around with it to justify their jobs.
What is the point of this kind of shit? These guys need to be pulled off the core Firefox team and put into the mobile Firefox OS design team or some shit where they might be relevant. I'm so sick and tired of mobile/smartphone/tablet UI trends infesting everything and anything. Oh yeah, I refuse to seriously use the term "UX". Outside of Apple cultists and design freaks, most people just consider the OS/program interface exactly that - an interface, not an experience.
To hell with all of this shit!
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more, by doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
You're trying to tell us adblock doing far less than hosts less efficiently too is better? LOL!
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more, by doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
:: = 0 or 0.0.0.0 in IPv4, & ::1 = loopback adapter address/127.0.0.1 in IPv4...
APK
P.S.=> Hosts work just fine in IPv6, using either :: (0.0.0.0 equivalent or 0 in Win2k SP#2 - Windows 7 pre 12/08/2009 MS Patch Tuesday's patch disabling the superior smaller/faster 0 there when it works on Win2k/XP/Server 2003 just fine still) OR using ::1 (loopback adapter address)... apk
:: = 0 or 0.0.0.0 in IPv4, & ::1 = loopback adapter address/127.0.0.1 in IPv4
APK
P.S.=> Hosts work just fine in IPv6, using either :: (0.0.0.0 equivalent or 0 in Win2k SP#2 - Windows 7 pre 12/08/2009 MS Patch Tuesday's patch disabling the superior smaller/faster 0 there when it works on Win2k/XP/Server 2003 just fine still) OR using ::1 (loopback adapter address)... apk
Linux isn't successful vs. MS on PC's + Servers combined They're no good example from you in that area. Trollishly attempting to "confuse the issue", a classic predictable troll move from you too? Please. Go away, troll.
It's weak vs. the FACT you can't prove a single thing I wrote is wrong: That, says it all.
APK
P.S.=>
"I'll trust a respected companies solution over some guy-in-a-basement's free hosts program who is probably just out to scam me." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @10:04PM (#47813357)
No scam here. What I wrote is 100% truth & obviously FACT you can't prove wrong - plus WHO THE HELL are "MyCleanPC"? I'd bank on it that their LEAD CODER hasn't done jack shit compared to myself in the art & science of computing as well (& I was doing things of great value that did well in publications in this field before he was out of diapers).
"At least MyCleanPC lets me hold someone responsible if I have a problem! What guarantee do I have that some "Anonymous Coward" will respond if I need support?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @10:04PM (#47813357)
I always answer support emails.
Always.
Your weak ac troll attempts @ "confusing the issue" here are pitiful... they truly are!
... apk
Try Pale Moon, if on Windows.
Quite close: http://arewefastyet.com/
The issue with back button which takes you to a browser page without any search is still there.....no fix as of yet...
Yup, from secuty point: something is wrong with the pinning CA, drop a fatal error message and you are ready.
But: No option to handle the connection as a unsecured connection. If you simply want to watch the intercepted information about funny cat video, the fact that there is a man in the middle attack is not interresting.
And: Something is alarml wrong error message. Nope, just that the connection might be intercepted, or not be from the original site. Nothing wrong with the PC of the user, but nothing he can do about it. Give him options!
You double DNS overheads using TCP vs. UDP (inefficient "fix"), & dns uses more electricity (higher bills), cpu/ram/other forms of I-O & DNS is more complexity + room for breakdown or exploit (kaminsky redirect poisoning flaw).
* A shame I had to blow you away, again, Ash-Fox... it's just (& you KNOW I've just gotta say it) too easy:
THIS? This was just "too, Too, TOO EASY - just '2ez'" & it always IS, vs. Ash-Fox the technically weak inferior troll...
APK
P.S.=> Disabling the USERMODE slower dnscache clientside local service makes large hosts files work in Windows perfectly (the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem takes over caching hosts & it is kernelmode as well - no overheads in context switch like dnscache is) - you FAIL AGAIN, Ash-Fox, as always:
Since 1 file (hosts) can do MORE than all of the other "complex" & security-issues riddled ones do, more efficiently & thus, better... apk
Per my subject-line above: This link is your proof of why https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
APK
P.S.=> Want to try something a LOT more efficient + a LOT more capable in terms of benefits it yields? Take a read here -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme... (you'll be glad you did - especially in YOUR case which illustrates MINE, to a tee, along with that link above, specifically)... apk
Ash-Fox uses TCP vs. UDP default for his INEFFICIENT "fix" making dns worse on efficiency by doubling overheads. As is, DNS has more complexity, room for breakdown/exploit,+ wastes cpu/ram/other forms of IO with a local dns server (far more electrical power use thus higher utility bills) vs. hosts http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
I do all you can do with 1 file (minus layering on more complexity as you do) - who's more efficient?
Hosts are, by far!
To the point of even complimenting DNS as well as LIGHTENING REQUEST LOADS ON THEM when you hardcode favorites as I do in hosts @ the TOP of my hosts file, where I spend 99.999% of my time online!
That even makes up for loss of indexing by DUMPING the usermode slow stupidly inflexible datastructure design dnscache service in Windows - which my 24 favs cached in the kernelmode local diskcache do make up for, equating to 2-3++ million indexed seeks...
(Which also SAVES CPU/RAM/Other forms of I-O WASTED on that mess of a faulty usermode SLOW service with large hosts files).
APK
P.S.=> Clue: Running a separate system especially, that is nothing but a DNS server, WILL increase your power bills (are you stupid?).
Better/BEST way = Using hosts in COMBINATION with a secured EXTERNAL DNS server (complimenting it):
E.G.-> OpenDNS = DNSSEC secured between it & their upstream updaters + it's patched vs. the Kaminsky redirect poisoning security flaw DNS has (of which 99.999% of ISP dns servers are NOT patched against).
... apk
Do DNS servers go down? Would apk's hosts hardcoded favs save you from it? Looks like a "yes" to both per this article http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
I run anywhere from 30 to 150 tabs open at a time. I'd say a nice average would be around 60 tabs.
I really cannot think of a reasonable workflow where that would make sense but I'm not trying to judge. As long as you are aware that you are doing something that almost nobody else does or even thinks is a good idea then go for it. Could be useful as a stress test I guess. I've been using Firefox (and Mozilla and Netscape before that) for a long long time and I've never seen behavior like what you describe but then I never thought it was a good idea to have 150 tabs open at once either.
My question would be, what have you done to isolate the problem? Are you sure it has anything to do with the number of browser tabs or is that merely coincidental? Are specific websites causing the problem? If something has changed is that something in Firefox or is it something in how the data is being served? You seem to be blaming Firefox but it isn't clear from your description that Firefox is the unquestionable source of the problem. It certainly should be on the list of possibilities but it isn't certain.
IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER IF YOU AREN'T EXPERIENCING THESE PROBLEMS! Why do you freaks always insist on denying that very real problems exist just because you haven't personally experienced them?
Yes it does matter if others aren't experiencing these problems because you can't fix a problem you can't reproduce. The problem is with people who complain that "Firefox is broken" but then never provide adequate data to isolate what they are doing that is causing the problem. If User A says Firefox is slow when doing Behavior X and User B tries Behavior X as described and cannot replicate the problem then the source of the problem has to be something more than solely Behavior X or it might have nothing at all to do with Behavior X because User B is mistaken. It could be how the software interacts with other software. It could be a hardware issue. It could be a version mismatch. It could be any number of things, particularly when you are talking about some weird corner use case like opening 200 tabs at once. (why anyone would do that eludes me)
These aren't isolated problems that people are reporting, either. The reports are numerous, widespread, yet still quite consistent. Firefox is slow. Firefox suffers from memory leaks. Firefox has a shitty UI these days.
On a daily basis I run Firefox and Chrome side by side at work (yes I have a good reason) on Windows PCs and sometimes Macs. I run IE and Safari with some regularity too. I see no evidence that Firefox is meaningfully faster or slower than any of the other major browsers. There probably are some differences but they are so minor as to be meaningless to most people in most cases. I have seen memory leaks in the past but I see no current evidence of them with the current stable builds. While they may exist I'm certainly not seeing much evidence of them. Provide a reproducible use case though and I'll of course reconsider. As for the "shitty UI" that is more a matter of opinion than fact. I don't think Firefox's interface is meaningfully better or worse than Chrome, Safari or IE. I wish they would stop needlessly screwing with it but that's a separate issue.
ALL OF THOSE COMPLAINTS ARE LEGITIMATE, AND ALL ARE FACTUAL!
Right, because who would ever lie on the internet? It's such a bastion of integrity and fair play.
Hardcoded favorite sites @ top of hosts = safe (where I spend 99.5++% of my time (efficiently as well since they're at the top of my hosts file & cached by a kernelmode subsystem, saving cpu cycles/ram/other forms of I/O wasted on the faulty with large hosts files usermode slow dnscache service in Windows)).
* With only 1 file/moving part, that's PART OF THE IP STACK ITSELF, via hosts (not "layering on" more complexity/learning curve + room for breakdown & exploit due to security flaws in DNS as you do)!
Hosts are also EASILY UNDERSTOOD & DIRECT USER CONTROLLED with notepad (any texteditor) vs. dns rulesets complexity + added moving parts complexity & room for breakdown + security issues (yes, DNS does go down QUITE A LOT)!
DNS also = HIGHER electrical power consumed/higher utility bills using DNS locally - especially on a separate system dedicated to THAT only...
Again: Best/better way = external secured DNS like OpenDNS (uses DNSSEC between it & its upstream updaters + is patched vs. Kaminsky redirect security flaw in DNS), complimenting it with hosts!
(Via your fav. sites hardcoded @ the top of hosts overcoming index loss in cutting the slow faulty with large hosts files usermode slower dnscache service in Windows - saving cpu cycles/ram/other forms of I-O wasted on it (bonus) & LIGHTENING UP REQUEST LOADS ON EXTERNAL DNS SERVERS TOO (double-bonus)).
Hosts are the 1st resolver queried: If I have blocking entries (which is MOST of my hosts file vs. known malicious sites + adbanners & spam/phish/trackers too), then I block those sites out, perfectly & easily.
APK
P.S.=> DNS (especially locally setup as a separate dedicated machine) = Inefficient - Especially DOUBLING dns overheads as you do, increasing its inefficiency which is already inferior to hosts, as is, using the UDP default & you using TCP literally DOUBLING your overheads, again + moreso...
... apk
If a DNS server goes down (or exploited by redirect) can hosts hardcodes protect you? A simple YES or NO will do as the answer Ash-Fox
* Clue (common-sense & physics):
Using "more" layering on more in DNS (above the IP stack, which hosts IS a native part of mind you & does the same as DNS can with less) DOES EAT MORE POWER, cpu cycles, RAM, + other forms of I/O too (& create complexity + room for breakdown/exploit also).
Lastly - YOU *may* not care about useability - others, do (especially less technical end users, & hosts are less complex + techish than DNS setups, by far...)
APK
P.S.=> "You don't see the problem"? of YOU LITERALLY DOUBLING OVERHEADS on a less efficient method in DNS (many moving parts & complexities + learning curve added) by your (mis)use TCP over the default UDP in DNS?? WTF??? LOL... apk
If they are trying to keep up with Chrome, they better start adding those new HTML 5.1 features too.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
See subject & the FACT you add on "more" = more power used/higher bills, cpu cycles/ram/+ other forms of I-O DNS servers use that hosts don't (especially *if* your local DNS is setup as a separate system): THIS IS NO "mere theory" - it's fact & common-sense!
2nd: Caching DNS can be INACCURATE (updates can happen when sites change hosting providers in the 24++ hr. period it can TAKE to propogate DNS changes thru the worldwide system for it (13 root to all dns on the planet takes time)).
By way of comparison: Updating my hosts favorites? Done in SECONDS!
(By reverse DNS ping, in the "Speedup Favorite Sites" tab of my APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit program -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... (just 1 of the MANY great benefits it gives you for more speed, & reliability over DNS faults, along with more security + anonymity too)).
*YOU* "moved the goalposts" Ash-Fox in you noting "useability", not I - you literally used that word, 1st!
(Which you are, yet again on this point + the one in my subject-line above, CONCEDING TO ME yet again - hosts are less complex & easier to understand than DNS in its entirety).
APK
P.S.=> Lastly - I don't USE DNSSEC (or DNS period since hosts do what it can w/ less waste &/or complexity + room for breakdown/exploit): OpenDNS does & it is patched PROPERLY vs. the Kaminsky flaw!
(Unlike your INEFFICIENT hackjob DOUBLING DNS OVERHEADS using TCP vs. the default UDP)
& yes - OpenDNS does use DNSSEC between it & its updaters - for security purposes!
(I rarely use OpenDNS though, even though it's the default remote DNS I use in both my IP Stack settings in Windows + in my router too - 99.5++% or better, I am @ the hardcoded favorite sites in my local hosts file, cached into RAM by a kernelmode subsystem (fast) vs. the FAULTY w/ large hosts files usermode clientside dnscache service in Windows (saving wasted CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O on a BROKEN poorly designed usermode slow wreck))... apk
"If you like linear search and have not bothered to do any timings on page loads I have and it is 50% slower than a DNS server over an 802.11b network" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03, 2014 @09:54AM (#47816147)
I don't put any more than 24 of my favorite sites in hosts @ the TOP of hosts (key point right there)!
That equals or exceeds 2-3++ million indexed seeks, first of all & also secures me vs. redirect poisoned (Kaminsky) security flaws DNS has unpatched & also makes me resolve FASTER than remote DNS calls since they're cached in RAM here (by the local kernelmode diskcaching subsystem since I use a LARGE hosts file).
Secondly - The rest of my hosts file is nothing more than blocked known bad sites/servers, adbanners, spammers/phishers & trackers!
* Thus - WHO CARES HOW "FAST" I GET TO THOSE, WHEN I NEVER INTENDED TO GET TO THEM IN THE 1st PLACE, stupid...
APK
P.S.=> Dumbells like YOU assume that I attempt to "cache the ENTIRE internet" in my hosts file: Clue - I don't! For other sites, other than my 24 favorites @ the TOP of my custom hosts file, I use OpenDNS (rarely, since I spend a good 99.5++% of the time @ those favorites online) - & it is DNSSEC secured to its upstream updaters + fully properly PATCHED vs. the Kaminsky redirect flaw (unlike 99.999% of ISP dns servers, which aren't)... apk
"if you do not mind that it is trivial to work around a.xyz.com != xyz.com != b.xyz.com have fun keeping up with thousands of subdomains" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03, 2014 @09:54AM (#47816147)
I don't mind it @ all: It's automated here via 12 reputable sources in the security community do THAT for me + my program that automates it all APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o...
APK
P.S.=> So far, your 1st 2 "so-called 'points'" have been RIDICULOUSLY EASY to get around & disprove!
Especially the first one, where YOU assumed I am *trying* to locally resolve every host-domain name under the sun to an IP address - clue/again: I don't, stupid http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
I.E./E.G.-> I use OpenDNS (DNSSEC secured between it & its upstream updaters + FULLY Kaminsky redirect poisoning properly patched vs. it)!
I use OpenDNS for any 'stragglers' I don't keep as favorites in hosts (& I rarely go to others, since I spend 99.5++% of my time online @ my favs. @ the TOP of my custom hosts file, which equates to 2-3++ million indexed seeks & is cached in RAM for speed here too, as well as hosts being the 1st resolver queried by default by the OS!)... apk
"if you do not mind your dns lookup program svchost.exe in windows taking up 40-50 more meg just incase you look something up" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03, 2014 @09:54AM (#47816147)
1st: I don't USE the faulty with large hosts files local dnscache usermode slow service!
2nd: I turn it off (for starters) saving CPU cycles, RAM, + others forms of I/O wasted on it (with good reason - it's faulty with large hosts files).
3rd: Instead, I opt for FASTER kernelmode caching via the local kernelmode diskcaching subsystem instead (which has NO SUCH FAULTS with larger hosts files).
* Thus - I both OFFSET loss of indexing (as I noted in my 1st post correcting your screwups in assumptions -> http://news.slashdot.org/comme... assuming I *try* to cache the ENTIRE range of host-domain names online, & I do not (OpenDNS which is DNSSEC secured to its upstream updaters + fully PROPERLY Kaminsky redirect flaw patched unlike 99.999% of ISP dns servers mind you is what I use for, oh, around .4% of the time when I rarely mind you, visit sites NOT in my 24 favs. @ the TOP of my custom hosts file (key point there, it equates to 2-3++ million indexed seeks right off the bat) and?
Doing it as I do in hosts also aids RELIABILITY vs. "downed" (crashed, which happens A LOT in DNS) dns servers + dns poisoned/redirected ones too!
(99.999% of ISP dns servers are NOT patched that way, mind you, vs. the kaminsky bug).
APK
P.S.=> Sorry for making a fool out of you, but... you are doing it TO YOURSELF, "point-by-'so called point'" of yours I am dismantling... apk
"yeah the site that serves up the hosts files and has all those adverts on them does not track you and the sites themselves cant track you at all" - by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 03, 2014 @09:54AM (#47816147)
1st: I never see them (blocked, they get no preferential treatment from me, & to be honest? I don't *think* they do that much, *IF* @ all whatsoever)!
2nd: Sites can't track me since I cut them off on trackers you CAN'T see both in hosts AND in my firewall rules table!
I.E./E.G. -> Here's mine for /. in fact -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... which stops tracking me here on slashdot since those are served up by IP Address, vs. host-domain names... ( & yes, it ALL works great!)
* :)
Lastly:
It *TRULY* has been MY PLEASURE, literally ANNIHILATING YOU for being an ignoramus on YOUR part, not reading my posts in their entirety (or you would not have made such STUPID mistakes & statement on YOUR part) in all of these posts:
http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Of course, lastly? This post too, lmao... apk
b
It's weak vs. the FACT you can't prove a single thing I wrote is wrong: That, says it all.
APK
P.S.=>
"I'll trust a respected companies solution over some guy-in-a-basement's free hosts program who is probably just out to scam me." - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @10:04PM (#47813357)
No scam here.
Plus/Obviously:
What I wrote ORIGINALLY is 100% truth & obviously FACT you can't prove wrong!
(Additionally - WHO THE HELL are "MyCleanPC"? I'd bank on it that their LEAD CODER hasn't done jack shit compared to myself in the art & science of computing as well (& I was doing things of great value & in commercially sold wares TO THIS DAY that did well in publications + technical tradeshows like MSTechEd in this field before he was out of diapers)).
"At least MyCleanPC lets me hold someone responsible if I have a problem! What guarantee do I have that some "Anonymous Coward" will respond if I need support?" - by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 02, 2014 @10:04PM (#47813357)
I always answer support emails.
Always.
Your weak ac troll attempts @ "confusing the issue" here are pitiful... they truly are!
... apk
Can manage to do against your points is to downmod your posts to try hide them apk. You've outsmarted and out thought the lot of them.
That running a DNS server uses NO extra electrical power, cpu cycles, RAM, & other types of I/O (which DNS has more "moving parts" above the IP stack itself which hosts IS part of mind you)?
(IF so, you are sadly mistaken...)
Caching on DNS *can* be inaccurate though - another point you *HAVE* to concede nevertheless, right there also!
You can use PING to do what I do for my top portion of my hosts file to verify host-domain name to IP address translation, but again: You're just PLAIN-JANE using "more", which means you're eating up more resources of ALL types noted above... point-blank/fact - no way around it: It's the laws of the universe.
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: The very FACT you're "adding on more", & a MORE COMPLEX 'more' no less, proves it all for me THAT YOU CONSUME MORE (of everything, period)!
That is, unless you can prove that running a DNS server (especially *IF* on a separate machine dedicated to it) takes:
1.) No extra electrical power to run itself
2.) No extra cpu cycles
3.) No extra RAM use
4.) No extra I/O
Vs. using hosts (which comes with the system natively and is always in use by the IP stack itself anyhow as the 1st resolver queried, always...).
Which is, to put it bluntly, IMPOSSIBLE for you to do (& you know it)...
... apk
Only security that I know of that boosts speed too: My FREE hosts program adds speed, security, reliability, & more, by doing more, more efficiently vs. addons + fixes DNS' issues:
APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:
http://start64.com/index.php?o...
---
A.) Hosts do more than:
1.) AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/... )
2.) Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
3.) Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...
B.) Hosts add reliability vs. downed/redirected dns (& overcome site redirects e.g. /. beta).
C.) Hosts secure vs. malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less "moving parts" complexity
D.) Hosts files yield more:
1.) Speed (adblock & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote dns)
2.) Security (vs. malicious domains serving malcontent + block spam/phish & trackers)
3.) Reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable dns, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ isp level + weak vs DGA, & Fastflux + dynDNS botnets)
4.) Anonymity (vs. dns request logs + dnsbl's).
---
* Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ faster levels (ring 0) vs redundant inefficient addons (slowing slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ os, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).
* Addons = more complex + slow browsers in messagepassing (use a few concurrently & see) & are nullified by native browser methods - It's how Clarityray's destroying Adblock.
* Addons slowup slower usermode browsers layering on more - & bloat RAM consumption + excessive cpu use too (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)
Instead, work w/ a native kernelmode part - hosts (An integrated part of the ip stack)
APK
P.S.=> "The premise is quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work for the body rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen: "I am legend"
...apk
Can adblock do the following things (that custom hosts files can):
1.) Secure you vs. known malicious sites/servers
2.) Secure you vs. downed DNS servers aiding reliability
3.) Secure you vs. DNS redirect poisoned dns servers
4.) Protect you vs. fastflux using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
5.) Protect you vs. dynamic dns using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
6.) Protect you vs. domain generation algorithm using botnet attacks and stop their communications back to their C&C servers
7.) Speed you up for websurfing not only by adblocking but also hardcoding favorite sites
8.) Get you past a dnsbl you may not agree with
9.) Keep you off dns request logs
10.) Do all of those things and block ads (better than adblock) more efficiently in cpu cycles and memory usage
11.) Work on ANY webbound application (think stand-alone email programs, for example).
12.) Give you direct, easily notepad/texteditor controlled data for all of the above
13.) Block out trackers
14.) Block spam mails sources
15.) Block phishing mails sources
"?"
* Simple YES or NO answers will do for repliers to this - that's all.
APK
P.S.=> Of course, ANSWER ="NO" to each enumerated item above as far as "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" (crippled by default & 'souled-out' defeating it's very base purpose) is concerned -> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...
So, *IF* you feel like doing things LESS efficiently as well -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... ontop of doing less than hosts do (by far) with more complexity + from a slower mode of operations (usermode with more messagepassing overheads vs. hosts in kernelmode, also starting up w/ the IP stack itself, before REDUNDANT inefficient addons even BEGIN to operate, & as the 1st resolver queried by the OS as well)?
That's illogical, but up to you - I can lead a horse to water, but I can't make them drink!
... apk
W. Palant wrote me by email 1st saying "hosts are a shitty solution" to which I replied:
"Show us adblock can do more for added speed, security, reliability, & anonymity than hosts can, + that adblock does it more efficiently than hosts"
Which on my latter 'point-in-challenge' on efficiency AdBlock's proven by research to be MASSIVELY inefficient -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... & adblock does FAR less than hosts (especially crippled by default).
I sent Wladimir Palant that challenge in response to his statement from 2 different email addresses I use!
Result = Still no answer from him in regard to my challenge put to him to this very day MONTHS later - that tell you anything? It did me!
He knows his addon is less efficient & features laden by FAR vs. hosts - Wladimir Palant RAN like a scared rabbit!
ClarityRay's also DESTROYING AdBlock - via native browser methods to DUMP what addons you use (it can't DO THAT to hosts files).
I only tell it how it is on hosts' superiority vs. AdBlock - Funny part is, Wladimir Palant running does too!
Especially considering "Almost ALL Ads Blocked" has 'souled-out' -> Google And Others Reportedly Pay Adblock Plus To Show You Ads Anyway: http://news.slashdot.org/comme...
APK
P.S.=> Bottom-Line: Hosts = a superior solution that also fixes DNS redirect security issues (vs. browser addons & their inefficiencies + messagepassing overheads as well as myriad lack of abilities hosts have from 1 file that's part of the IP stack itself - faster, more efficient, & less redundant as well, since TCP/IP has 45++ yrs. of refinement & optimization in it, & runs in a higher CPU serviced ring of privelege & operations in kernelmode vs. slower usermode layering over browsers slowing them more, & hosts = 1st resolver queried by the OS itself also)... apk
Then, you know very little about how computers & programs work then: Clue - nothing is 'free', period.
* Per my subject-line above - Yet you LITERALLY admit this:
"is this tiny amount of usage really an issue on modern computers? Could you show your evidence on the notable differences? " - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Thursday September 04, 2014 @07:59AM (#47823961)
I really don't *have* to now by this point... NOT after THAT admission from you quoted just above.
---
I can instantly update my hosts file's "favorite sites" via those pings (only using what is native to the IP stack, NOT "adding on more moving parts complexity + eating more resources running a DNS system" as YOU, do DO)... lol, NOW you're telling us you're using YET ANOTHER PROGRAM do "help DNS"? Please... it NEEDS help.
Especially vs. hosts (which you even ADMIT fixes dns security issues like redirect poisoning OR being down, for end users of hosts).
APK
P.S.=> Getting you to see REASON & LOGIC wasn't easy, but in the end, that quote of yours PROVES you do (realizing that running a DNS server with all of its parts that consume more electrical power, CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O is indeed, reality + fact - & that you are ADDING THOSE ON, eating up more of those resources just listed by the very fact you're using them thus)... apk
Question: Does running a DNS mean adding more things running in a computer & IF SO, do those extra parts mean consuming more CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O too, as well as consuming MORE POWER to do those things?
Just answer that...
After all/By way of comparison:
ALL I DO, is use what is natively present & already in use, in hosts (which are part of the IP stack itself natively + the 1st resolver always queried by default) - YOU add on "more", & that definitely MEANS consuming more (doing almost the same as I do, but hosts can save your tail and users too, which you already conceded, see below... I don't see it "the other way around" on DNS saving hosts though).
APK
P.S.=> Just answer that question - You'll HAVE to concede that as you have already conceded that hosts can protect users vs. DNS being "downed"/crashed & vs. redirect poisoning AND that hosts are easier to use/less complex, already in this exchange earlier... apk
See subject-line: You refused to answer a simple question & that IS the answer above... period.
There IS no "free lunch" & you ARE adding on MORE to be able to do what I do from a SINGLE NATIVE PART of the IP STACK ITSELF - hosts (which means you DO consume more power, ram, cpu cycles, & other forms of I/O which = more electricity used/higher bills...)
* :)
(YOU know it, I know it, & so would anyone else reading who has an ounce of common-sense + understands it's a fact of life...)
APK
P.S.=> Besides: You'll *HAVE* to concede that running more programs (DNS) means eating more power since it's a fact of life!
Just as you had to already concede that:
1.) DNS is more complex/more of a learning curve/less simple to understand than hosts
2.) Hosts can fix &/or defend users of all kinds vs. DNS redirect poisoning AND crashing/downed DNS also... apk
You're using 1 lightbulb in a room & you turn on 1 more: Are you using more power? Yes.
QUESTION: So - if you decide to "pile on more" using a DNS server there AS YOU DO - Are you consuming more CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O too?
That = MORE POWER USAGE & HIGHER ELECTRICITY BILLS, fact/period...
---
This "takes the cake" from you though:
"And you conceded hosts files can break windows services and I've pointed out that DNS can do all of this too without downing a windows service." - by Ash-Fox (726320) on Thursday September 04, 2014 @10:37AM (#47825195)
LMAO: Hosts don't "break" a damned thing - MS designed poorly on their local dnscache usermode SLOWER service & it can't handle relatively larger hosts (Linux has NO SUCH ISSUE by the way)!
So, I turn it off, & guess what THAT does?
ANSWER = I am LITERALLY saving CPU cycles, RAM, & other forms of I/O wasted on it since it's faulty by design... + yes, power too.
I literally SAVE power & opt instead to use a FASTER KERNELMODE service to cache hosts - the diskcaching subsystem (& my placing 24 of my favorite sites @ the TOP of hosts also gets me indexing speeds back to the tune of 2-3++ MILLION indexed seeks also).
Funniest part is, DNS has its security issues FIXED BY HOSTS, easily (not doubling dns overheads as your INEFFICIENT "fix" using TCP vs. UDP default in DNS does) - I still don't SEE that YOU are able to say THAT either.
APK
P.S.=> Besides - You've already ADMITTED that DNS has more of a learning curve/complexity & the fact You ADMITTED hosts can secure users vs. downed DNS as well as You ADMITTED hosts can secure users vs. redirect poisoned DNS too...
... apk
I had ff beta for a long time on our computer, but then number 30 went up. Mozilla Firefox don't work it said. Okej I say to my wife, we skip the beta. Nothing changes, the same Mozilla Firefox don't work came up. Yesterday I had enough and installed Opera.