Sidki's filters block ZA free download

[lnminente]

hehehe you are amazing PR!!! If i give you the imei of my mobile, what could you know about me? nothing more, only the government could across my network provider... Anyway i respect your thoughts (in old times i thinked like you), and are needed people like you, viva the nonconformists!!

Using file monitor from sysinternals, i see this file is created under the folder crash reports, so disable crash reporting. I fully understand the want to know from who comes the bug to later solve it.

Quote:Mozilla Crash Reporter is enabled by default and there is no user interface to disable it. Advanced users who prefer the standard application error notifications (e.g., the Windows error dialog "<application> has encountered a problem and needs to close" and Event Viewer record) can disable the Mozilla Crash Reporter by setting the environment variable MOZ_CRASHREPORTER_DISABLE to 1.

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Breakpad

[ProxRocks]

the "crash reports" is a Firefox 3 beta 3 and newer thingie only...
prior to that, Firefox used "Quality Feedback Agent"...

the TCP-conn's have ALWAYS been a part of Firefox, it's not something "introduced" in 3.0...

foregoing the Mozilla folder, any browser that needs anything more than a TCP/8080/127.0.0.1 to Proxo and a UDP/in-out-any/127.0.0.1 from Proxo is INSANE MADNESS!...

[Graycode]

(Nov. 20, 2008 05:04 PM)ProxRocks Wrote:  foregoing the Mozilla folder, any browser that needs anything more than a TCP/8080/127.0.0.1 to Proxo and a UDP/in-out-any/127.0.0.1 from Proxo is INSANE MADNESS!...

Firefox uses self-connections (from & to itself on localhost 127.0.0.1) as a way to access data such as its own cache. They do that in order to achieve a level of control between all the various threads that are fetching & rendering content for the pages you're trying to view. The TCP ports for that activity are ephemeral, they'll be different for each invocation of Firefox, and for Windows they should be in the range of 1025 thru 5000 or so.

That activity could be considered "safe" because it doesn't even get onto the ethernet wire. But if you just want to block that, then hopefully things will still continue to function.

Like you, I don't do Crash Reports either. Usually when it breaks it turns out to be something I was testing in my proxy ... that's not anything Mozilla needs to worry about.

[Mele20]

(Nov. 20, 2008 03:12 PM)lnminente Wrote:  hehehe you are amazing PR!!! If i give you the imei of my mobile, what could you know about me? nothing more, only the government could across my network provider... Anyway i respect your thoughts (in old times i thinked like you), and are needed people like you, viva the nonconformists!!

Using file monitor from sysinternals, i see this file is created under the folder crash reports, so disable crash reporting. I fully understand the want to know from who comes the bug to later solve it.

Quote:Mozilla Crash Reporter is enabled by default and there is no user interface to disable it. Advanced users who prefer the standard application error notifications (e.g., the Windows error dialog "<application> has encountered a problem and needs to close" and Event Viewer record) can disable the Mozilla Crash Reporter by setting the environment variable MOZ_CRASHREPORTER_DISABLE to 1.

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Breakpad

I never allowed the old crash reports. I don't see how to disable this new crash reporter. It sent one report SILENTLY. That really pisses me off. Even Microsoft doesn't force you to send the reports (I frequently send them to Microsoft but it should be my decision each time and Mozilla has no business forcing this on users). Where do you set the "environment variable MOZ_CRASHREPORTER_DISABLE to 1"?

Since I didn't know where to set that I tried to do the second thing which is to disable it in the Firefox application.ini" file. But when I opened that file in notepad, I saw nothing about that. I just saw some text for what is shown the user when there is a crash.

This is on Vista, and it may be different on XP. I'll start the virtual machine with XP and Fx 3 and see. I found it easily in the application.ini file on Fx3 on XP. I must have scrolled past it on Vista. I opened it in notepad and that created a gigantic horizontal scrollbar so I probably scrolled by too fast to see it in Vista. I got disabled on both virtual machines that run Fx3.

Fx 1.5 (on my host XP machine) is using an ancient profile and crashing a lot now (I'm sure it's that profile causing the crashing as I have never before used a profile for half as long as this one before I had to create a new one) but I am so glad that on my host machine that I have never upgraded beyond 1.5. That was the last version of Fx where the developers still cared at all about the privacy of their users.

[lnminente]

(Nov. 21, 2008 07:08 AM)Mele20 Wrote:  That was the last version of Fx where the developers still cared at all about the privacy of their users.

I have crash reports enabled, and they ask me before reporting. So i don't have any problem with this...
I am enjoying a freeware program i really like and the only thing i do for "them" is reporting the errors i had

[ProxRocks]

(Nov. 21, 2008 07:08 AM)Mele20 Wrote:  It sent one report SILENTLY. That really pisses me off. Even Microsoft doesn't force you to send the reports (I frequently send them to Microsoft but it should be my decision each time and Mozilla has no business forcing this on users).

BINGO! my point EXACTLY...

now "riddle me this, riddle me that", did that SILENT report pass "thru" Proxo, or did it 'evolve' out of those STUPID start-up TCP-conn's? More yet, did it open up its OWN UDP-out DNS port 53?

don't get me wrong, it's not "only" Firefox that has my excessive-paranoia meter pegged full throttle... i have to block URL-connects for both Sleipnir (update.fenrir.co.jp/ and update.fenrir-inc.com/) AND Maxthon (update.maxthon.com/client/m2/newversion/), even though 'check for updates' is disabled in both...

call it "excessive" if you want (i've never had silent crash reports sneak out from under me), but there are LEGIT (imo) reasons why i only "trust" Opera and GreenBrowser (then Maxthon [with the "phone-home" really being its only 'flaw'], then Sleipnir, then Firefox, in that order)... but yeah, all FIVE of my browsers (six, if you count IE, but i NEVER use IE, just "shells") ALL have their positives, else i wouldn't have them on the hard drive ...

(yeah, i trust Opera the MOST, but GreenBrowser is my default for hot-key functionality reasons...)

these crash report thingies, i'm all for reporting "bugs" to the "creator"... BUT it MUST be "voluntary"... i myself report bugs when i see a set pattern result in a repeatable crash, but no, i'm not about to report that something crashed when my PC's CPU was working overtime on twenty different things at once...

[lnminente]

Ok, i didn't realized about silently reporting by now...

Anyway each time i make a decision, i try to understand the opposite radical ways.
For this case the both opposite ways are:
.1 people wich trust anyone, browse the web without antivirus, neither firewall...
.2 people wich don't trust anyone. So always use the best firewall and the best antivirus, taking the maximum information about the processes.

The pros an cons of each group:
1- They are happy. They don't waste his time in doubly things. They pay one night in a hostel in Praha only if they go to Praha
2- They are more clever. They know what they do, they do more than the others in less time, they pay two nigths in a hostal of Praha for the possibility they go to Praha, but maybe they never go to Praha.

The second group is the one wich can teach me more knowledge, but the first is the one wich can teach me more about life. I realize people from first group are happily browsing and very probably nobody will spy them, they will be only in the statistics on many webs, and this doesn't hurts them. With a bit of bad experiences people from first group will not have any virus. Software safety is auto-updated, but not social ingeneering...

Sincerously i prefer to spend my time doing filters for browsing more confortable than avoiding tracking, but i like to learn something new everyday. So people clever near to the second group lets speak about safety better, when you don't trust in any software, wich software do you use to watch/control it:
process explorer from systinternals, file monitor from sysinternals, sandboxie, thinstall ?

[Graycode]

I have limited trust in Firefox. Still though I limit its ability to do a lot of things. In its about:config I've changed every one of its URL to instead point to NO.NO as the domain. Then in my proxy I block the non-existing NO.NO domain so I can tell if Firefox tries to use any of those. The attached image shows part of my 2.0.0.18 settings, I've done the same for version 3. I've specified my preference to "just say NO".