Quote
StayatHome
Hello everybody! How well does Kmeleon browser handle in case of hacker attacks? Does this browser have the same security as Google Chrome or any other major browser? Can I use it in banking operations? Thank you in advance!

K-Meleon is a Mozilla browser, and gives access to many technical settings theat other browsers hide from you. Mozilla is generally (much) more secure than other browser families, especially the QtWeb/WebKit/Blink family, which now includes Edge.

Having said that, we are not talking about add-ons or macros. This is baked-in, and needs access to a configuration utility which Mozilla calls "about:config".

OK. Mozilla config contains many security settings which can be set individually according to your needs. For example, you can set the SSL/TLS parameters to lock out insecure servers, and you can disable or enable installed cipher suites. Many of these settings can be accessed via the F2 settings GUI, for example Cookie Handling.

K-Meleon can definitely be used in banking operations. It is natively far more secure than most banking websites. While we are here, you need a secure password policy. Most attacks happen because people don't care about secure passwords: "G0 aMay" is not secure as it will be picked up in a look-up table within a few micro-seconds. And people re-use their passwords because it's easier to remember one password than ten or fifteen of them. BUT. It's OK to write them down in a list near your computer. The reasoning is, that if a bad person has access to your computer desk, you are in far more trouble than merely losing your privacy.

You can find password generators online, or -- if you are happy with spreadsheets -- you can build one yourself.

A-a-a-ndd... Hacker attacks. These are scripted attacks launched from polluted or hostile sites, and browsers do not normally defend against them. For these you need an external defence, which is (in my case) composed of an white-listing anti-executable like VoodooShield, and a good firewall like Windows Firewall with Windows Firewall Control (WFC) set to disallow all outbound traffic. WFC is a free utility available from MalwareBytes wich gives easy access to all WIndows Firewall settings.

____________________
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic. [Florence Ambrose, "Freefall" 01372 January 22, 2007 http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1400/fv01372.htm]

Nice answer, this post should be keep alive. Thanks.

I like. How do we go about it?

____________________
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic. [Florence Ambrose, "Freefall" 01372 January 22, 2007 http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1400/fv01372.htm]

Should we make it sticky?

Yes please

____________________
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic. [Florence Ambrose, "Freefall" 01372 January 22, 2007 http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1400/fv01372.htm]

Quote
gordon451
K-Meleon is a Mozilla browser, and gives access to many technical settings theat other browsers hide from you. Mozilla is generally (much) more secure than other browser families, especially the QtWeb/WebKit/Blink family, which now includes Edge.

Bullshit. Chromium is ahead of FF and derivatives in terms of security: https://grapheneos.org/usage#web-browsing

I like Mozilla-type browsers better than Chromium-based ones, but we should still stick with the truth, no?

Quote
Anonymous
... Chromium is ahead of FF and derivatives in terms of security: https://grapheneos.org/usage#web-browsing

I like Mozilla-type browsers better than Chromium-based ones, but we should still stick with the truth, no?

OK, you have your opinion, and yes I have just skimmed the article.

HOWEVER. The QtWeb/WebKit/Blink family does not allow the user to "lift the lid", there are no detail settings exposed to users, they have to take whatever the publisher wants them to have. Mozilla is fundamentally an "old-fashioned" philosophy, that allows the user to choose the settings that give the best results.

For example. If I wish -- using any version of QtWeb/WebKit/Blink -- to tell my browser to not entertain any server that permits "unsafe neotiation" (unencrypted SSL/TLS version negotiation), I can't do it. There is no mechanism allowing that degreee of access. The same applies to the collateral setting "Treat unsafe negotiation as broken". Both these settings become very highly important if you're using a wireless connection (of any description) to the internet.

The linked article talks about sandboxes, but it doesn't talk about sandbox insecurity. Ad-blocking is inherently unstable no matter how you do it; anti-fingerprinting is nearly as useful as house-slippers in a mudpatch, because you can be tracked as much by things you don't show as by the things you do show.

I wonder why the article does not even mention the user-agent?

I could go on for several pages. You are welcome to voice your own opinion, but please be aware that Google is rather like Microsoft: both don't want users delving under the hood, and neither deliver the best possible products all the time. Having said all that, I agree with you in one respect: I tried Firefox when it was still new-ish, and found it completely inadequate then, and see no indication that it has improved over the decades since. But the Mozilla philosophy allows Gecko forks to be far better and more secure than FF ever will be.

____________________
Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic. [Florence Ambrose, "Freefall" 01372 January 22, 2007 http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff1400/fv01372.htm]

Quote
Anonymous
Chromium is ahead of FF and derivatives in terms of security

Perheaps is Google itself the primary and general security/privacy problem of Chromium. Google has a wonderful search machine indeed (allthough it still oftener finds anything possible but not what I inserted in the search line, and still less useful information on the screen if yet, in the last time) but in other interests better fingers away