From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QpCwd-0007vF-EG for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 05 Aug 2011 05:27:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B27F621C12D; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 05:27:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vw0-f53.google.com (mail-vw0-f53.google.com [209.85.212.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42BCF21C075 for ; Fri, 5 Aug 2011 05:26:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so2362574vws.40 for ; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:26:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=VYNtnPgzUngcLRpZ5km7QIqPksoUdG8dVnj6XoMsWVg=; b=eHWJny3Zo4aRGXtR6Vru77Apf8KLMxuW1GIfy4L+rmNWUp49aF0EVAL9t93oR408ch 0KoFTsAmVMNgbnHPScZrazdNrVLmk4nAogBLixYdIhtG9x7/2kW3giLlvRXJnLanWVKT sH16lbuoXE0fKf7lni/pKTt6tKK2zSgZS3KFk= Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.71.236 with SMTP id y12mr1853442vdu.79.1312521990724; Thu, 04 Aug 2011 22:26:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.52.183.228 with HTTP; Thu, 4 Aug 2011 22:26:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4E3B6BF6.4090801@asyr.hopto.org> <4E3B755D.2060606@asyr.hopto.org> Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2011 01:26:30 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] www-client/chromium From: Matthew Finkel To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3071cce4045bdf04a9bb57d3 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: a161fe7c79c4676d0f2e028ce02f1ce4 --20cf3071cce4045bdf04a9bb57d3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:14 AM, Adam Carter wrote: > >> You've made an assumption there. > > > > Maybe my assumption isn't true, after all seeing the list for firefox > > that Matthew pointed to, although with firefox we don't see upgrades so > > often, I guess we should *not* feel more secure with it... > > The noscript firefox addon gives significant protection with only a > little inconvenience. There was no equivalent for chromium last time I > checked, and it still doesn't have a master password to protect saved > webform passwords. Chromium is faster than a pgo build of firefox so i > would prefer to use it, but not until those two issues are addressed. > > I felt the same way, but then I found NotScript [0]. It's decent, I do like noscript a bit better, but it gets the job done. I can't recall anything about a master password, though, so that may still be a valid concern. 0. https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/odjhifogjcknibkahlpidmdajjpkkcfn -- Matthew Finkel --20cf3071cce4045bdf04a9bb57d3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:14 AM, Adam Carter <adamcarter3@gmai= l.com> wrote:
>> You've made an assumption there.
>
> Maybe my assumption isn't true, after all seeing the list for fire= fox
> that Matthew pointed to, although with firefox we don't see upgrad= es so
> often, I guess we should *not* feel more secure with it...

The noscript firefox addon gives significant protection with only a little inconvenience. There was no equivalent for chromium last time I
checked, and it still doesn't have a master password to protect saved webform passwords. Chromium is faster than a pgo build of firefox so i
would prefer to use it, but not until those two issues are addressed.


I felt the same way, but then I found NotScript [0].= It's decent, I do like noscript a bit better, but it gets the job done= .=A0I can't recall anything about a master password, though, so that ma= y still be a valid concern.

--20cf3071cce4045bdf04a9bb57d3--