@QuHno said in Worrying news about Startpage and DuckDuckGo:
@Dr-Flay I wonder why hidemysearches doesn't use POST but GET in their search form at the top of the about page and on their homepage ...
All search engine I use are put in POST, Startpage too
@Dr-Flay said in 2018 AV comparison:
@Pathduck I don't remember if Bitdefender nag you. Possibly but it was not so problematic that it left an impression on me.
I think Avira free will usually show a popup each day, but that never bothered me much.
I think both companies rely on people paying because they like and trust it, rather than pressure and nagging.
You certainly should not be getting that crap from paid products. I am certain neither Bitdefender or Avira nag you to buy more once you paid.
Avira gives you a little launcher that has all their products in it. You just install the free stuff you can make use of, and ignore the others.
Worth remembering that Avast got in trouble twice over selling customer data (also from other products such as CCleaner), so don't forget to find that option they had to add to not share your data.
AVG also got into trouble over the same thing, but now they are the same company so as a bonus you will get the same support and trust as Avast.
I have to say, F-Secure were one of the consistent top 5 options for a long time, but the past couple of years they are also up and down like a yo-yo, but mainly the false positives rate has become consistently bad.
They are still a serious player in the security world, and 1 of those groups you often see news reports from about some new threat they cracked, and even though they are as bad as MS with false positives, I would probably use F-Secure.
If I enable runtime scanning in MSSEssentials on my laptops, they are so slow to do anything I feel like punching them.
It is worth noting that the MS tests that were done a while ago to prove how secure Windows is using MS security, relied on having Enhanced Mitigation Experience Tool installed, and set to high security level (eg. not the default), and relying on smartscreen protection in IE and Edge to talk to MS AV, because it does not talk to non-MS browsers ( they could make extensions for other browsers, but choose not to).
Who do you know that ever installed EMET let alone changed it from the default "recommended" setting to high ?
(Even though now they integrated it into Win10, the settings are on default opt-in, not high security opt-out protections.)
Who do you know that opts to use IE or Edge because of security ?
The MS tests did not mirror the average (or indeed any) computer setup or use, so all those researchers that kept quoting it should actually spend some time looking at the evidence, and compare to their own use.
In laymans terms, when I get a PC come in for deinfestation of malware, I can almost guarantee it is "protected" by 1 of 3 usual suspects.
Norton, McAfee or Microsoft.
Or a magic 8-ball.
It is true that the free versions of most current AV do not differ in their efficiency of the Pro versions, the latter as a rule have only a few additional functions (family filters personalized technical assistance, access to other tools, etc.) -
PS I have better experiences with Glary Utilities than with the CCleaner
@catweazle Thanks for the info. I only use the Gift cards when I want something from apple, but that is rare as I have old apple tech.
Will be on guard for phishing attempts and invitations to Family Sharing!
@millerb270 said in Fox News won't open--"Not Secure" comes up:
I think the problem is that the owners of vivaldi don't want fox news on their browser.
No, wrong – Vivaldi owners do never block websites.
If your Fox News does not show correctly, check if you have extensions installed in Vivaldi, check your Internet Security software, check your proxy and/or VPN connection (if you use any).
As nice as it will be to close the holes with unencrypted traffic this doesn't really solve very much at all. At the end of the day the snooper still knows which IP your requests are going to and therefore the vast majority of the time what site you are visiting. Sites using SNI tend to be closely related to other sites on that same server - usually subdomains of the main domain or domains owned by the same company, so even if I don't know that you visited abc.acme.net, I still know you visited an acme.net site. e.g. google.com isn't sharing servers with microsoft.com.
I would also expect adoption to be extremely low since it requires both generating the keys - this part could be handled automatically as part of the webserver setup and therefore causes minimal concern, but also publishing the public key in a DNS record which is something barely anyone except dedicated sysadmins, a few good shared hosting/CDN companies and enthusiastic hobbyists will bother to do. Just look at the pitifully low uptake of CAA records etc. TLS by default only really gained ground because of Let's Encrypt making the process as painless as possible, but scripts run on the webserver are not going to have access to change DNS records.
@dantesoft Yup, page scrolling, hyperlinks et al -- all seems "normal" to me on that page & child pages launched from it. In fact [this will sound silly], i had actually completely forgotten all about SSI for a long time, & only rediscovered a few days ago that i am in fact running with it [ie, given it is mega-yonks since i last bothered looking at my flags, it's ipso facto also mega-yonks since i last re-enabled SSI]. Wrt other flags, nope. In past years i have run my V's with a plethora of specific flags set at non-default values, but during some extensive troubleshooting [wait for it] mega-hyper-ultra-yonks ago i never bothered re-enabling any of them again afterwards, except SSI.