Minor update (2) for Vivaldi Desktop Browser 6.7
-
@Ruarí sadly there seems to still exist a massive regression compared to 6.6 using
Wayland.When using
ozone-platform=waylandafter a Drag&Drop the UI hangs andVivaldisegfaults on close (VB-106251).
Not an issue with latest 6.6 or when usingozone-platform=X11. -
Ok, i will try uBlock Origin, maybe Vivaldi can reimagine ad blocking.
-
@iPristy, blocking ads on YT is going to be increasingly difficult, but I usually avoid them, using the Violentmonkey extension and these scripts instead.
A very small one (4 lines), which opens the Video in a new tab, when you click on its URL or in the list of videos in the video with the right button, in an embedded way, this also avoids the ads.
You can do this also by Hand editing the Video URL, instead ofhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxxxxxedit it to
https://www.youtube.com/embed/xxxxxxThe script do this automaticly
And the script of an ad skipper, which does not block the ads, but skips them.
This and the Vivaldi tracker blocker, no ads.
-
It would be incredibly helpful if you'd indicate in an obvious way when a browser version lacks security fixes. Sometimes I tend to skip minor updates if they seem not important because I'm in some kinda rabbit hole with 93 open tabs in 5 windows. Or I wasn't on the laptop for a few days and the security fix version is overshadowed by other versions.
-
@Noir You can check the blog article with its changelog. Mentioning Chromium mostly means that a security update was done.
-
I described the issue from my personal experience. But it's not only about me. Users should always be made aware if they're using a vulnerable product. I also think the release notes displayed in the update window are identical to the one in the blog.
@DoctorG said in Minor update (2) for Vivaldi Desktop Browser 6.7:
Mentioning Chromium mostly means that a security update was done.
Hopefully this is not true because hiding security fixes is very bad practice. At least I observed that security fixes are explicitly mentioned sometimes.
Despite the bad practice, when considering the whole user base we can't assume this kinda knowledge. It's not even documented somewhere.
-
@Noir No person hides security fixes. This is your wrong assumption.
And es sometimes it is mentioned in blog and changelog that a security fix happened.Most users run update without reading changelogs.
And you want only update if it is a security fix?
-
We do not hide whether an update has security fixes
In fact, we are quite open about it:"Aside from bug fixes, almost every release will contain security fixes, security enhancements, new security protections or something related to security, either directly from us, or as part of the Chromium updates. They often also include stability fixes (for crashers). Skipping updates is almost never a good idea. They are all important, or we wouldn't be releasing them. This is pretty standard for security oriented software products like browsers, and the same would apply to any other browser."
The main reason we don't list security fixes for Chromium is that we do not run the Chromium project. The Chromium project announces their security fixes, and we inherit them, as with all products that use an open source package. We often add security patches ahead of time too, even if we are using an older release of Chromium, but most of time, the people making our changelogs don't actually check exactly how many security fixes are in Chromium, and which of them we already patched by the development team in previous updates. They just say "it got a Chromium update", and you can assume that every Chromium update is important in some way, whether it is new functionality, new website compatibility changes, security enhancements or security fixes.
We already tell you to update, and the browser tells you to update. We are working on a way to remind you if you have fallen behind on updates.
