Add blockers-Seamonkey and Palemoon

[April]

I love Seamonkey but it has been stuffed up in the last couple of years as adblock and others could not be put into extensions whatever they changed .

I used Seamonkey only for special purposes because all the bloody adds came up , my machine cpu fan came on loudly and in the background it was downloading adds flat out.!!!

I have stopped this .

UBlock Origin seems to work and works for Palemoon maybe?

To get it you need the Legacy version from https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock-for- ... -1.16.4.26 Drag it into seamonkey and voila.

Here is a bit more of a discussion on Barry's site you can read up a bit. https://easyos.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=235

Keep in mind too that the Opera browser can be downloaded free and that supplies a free VPN that protects your browsing from prying eyes. Well , I hope it does hide some.

[JASpup]

Interesting April I'm just started using Pup Advert-Blocker and it seems to make a positive difference tho some sites will crash.

I intend to start using Seamonkey more as Pale Moon has performance hiccups.

I experience them 1st-hand and it's been reported.

UBlock seems a quality blocker but we're forfeiting privacy.

[mikeslr]

If you download and install (IIRC use your browser's file>open) ca-archive-2.0.3.xpi https://github.com/JustOff/ca-archive/r ... /tag/2.0.3 both Seamonkey and Palemoon can use/install the 'old firefox' extensions.

But, despite that it was sold to an add agency, I prefer Waterfox-Classic which can use ca-archive for old extensions and all the new firefox-quantum extensions. Scroll-down from the top of the page, https://www.waterfox.net/download/ to the link for Classic. Note, Waterfox is 64-bit only.

Waterfox addons.png (87.14 KiB) Viewed 398 times

It's a portable. Just download and extract. You can flinch the wrapper script from portable firefox, palemoon or seamonkey, edit it to point to the waterfox bin and fully portablize it: cache and profiles in its own folder.

See this thread. viewtopic.php?p=1198#p1198 No problem viewing youtubes. System1 posted somewhere that it respects privacy: that it strips out profile information and doesn't save it and, IIRC, uses only the accumulated numeric data regarding webpage hits. Currently, I have no reason to doubt that claim. But then, as the above screenshot shows, I've installed Addons which block adverts and bolster privacy. These installed without issue and appear to be functioning. So I have no reason to think System1 has dismantled the privacy/security protections which had been built into Waterfox when System1 acquired it.

[amethyst]

I have adblock latitude extension installed in Palemoon. Also blocks youtube ads.

[user1111]

Interesting April I'm just started using Pup Advert-Blocker and it seems to make a positive difference tho some sites will crash.
.
.
UBlock seems a quality blocker but we're forfeiting privacy.

I use https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts ... copying the hosts file to /etc/hosts ... pretty much the same as PupAdBlock

Many Puppy's forfeit privacy anyway. Try your Spot/whatever userid running whatever browser and browse to file:///sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id ... as just one example and the 'browser' might be able to see (and hence javascript potentially forward) details such as unique motherboard serial number/whatever. So if you go through tails/tor and lapse with blocking javascript (as many sites don't work without it), your device/fingerprint can still be determined. Also if you're running X with one window as root, another as spot, the spot session can potentially 'stuff' commands into the root window(s) - as just one example of privilege elevation. Or with sufficient detail of the hardware/software being used, flaws (bugs) can be used. Let alone (lack of) security of ssh keys i.e. again the browser might be able to see the .ssh folder content, your private key and all of the systems you ssh into (such that revealing of such provides hackers a easy path into other systems). Wifi SSID and passwords are also commonly stored, to facilitate reconnection if the link drops, and may be visible to the browser. etc. etc. https://madaidans-insecurities.github.i ... ox-escapes

Even EasyOS, with its Qubes like style, primarily is a means to protect data/folders, is not a anti-privacy tool. Puppy's aren't real multi-user, so the likes of containers are used within EasyOS instead of the more 'normal' separation by userid/permissions within a multi-user setup. Maybe a sakura/terminal container for ssh'ing (keys), a browser container for general browsing, both isolated from the main session where data is kept.

Fundamentally if you want both data security and privacy then a VPS that you vnc into is one way to go for gui type activities. Others simply opt to drop gui insecurities and primarily utilise cli (ssh, mutt, lynx, mc, irc, maillists ...etc. type programs, and only resort to gui for more point to point connections (direct to individual web sites)).

Basically the battle for privacy has largely been lost due to lack of desire of confrontation. where on the one side there's massive capital and skills, opposed by a common lack of any desire for privacy. And over time the methods have become even more sophisticated, such as inaudible tones sent to one device being reported back as having been heard by other devices. Probability algorithms that can identify individuals, their profile and common devices broadly are very accurate nowadays. And are so widespread that even those that do opt to go off-grid are likely all too obvious and identifiable simply by their absence.

The answer is IMO that the illegality of high level surveillance by commercial entities needs to be squashed. It's mostly a human right to be able to live without very high levels of reporting of your actions/activites, including within your own home.