Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy The Internet Software

Epic: A Privacy-Focused Web Browser 223

Posted by Soulskill
from the i-know-what-you-googled-last-summer dept.
Rob @CmdrTaco Malda writes "I've been advising Epic Browser, a startup building a privacy-focused, Chrome-based browser that starts where incognito mode ends. Epic employs a host of tactics designed to make what happens inside your browser stay there, to the tune of a thousand blocks in a typical hour of browsing. They also provide a built-in proxy service. If the corporations and governments are going to watch us, there's no reason to make it any easier for them. Epic has Mac and Windows builds for now. Their site goes into far greater detail about how they block tracking methods most browsers don't."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Epic: A Privacy-Focused Web Browser

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Chrome? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 06, 2013 @09:49AM (#44774709)

    Based off Chromium, not Chrome. The first is open source.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 06, 2013 @10:01AM (#44774869)

    Ads and search results never include any personalized results or tracking

    So, ads yes, tracking no. Or in other words, what search engine ads were like before Google. Something relevant to exactly what you typed in, nothing more.

    Or at least that's the claim.

  • by jopet (538074) on Friday September 06, 2013 @10:02AM (#44774897) Journal

    Closed source? Seems legit.

  • Re:Proxy ? (Score:3, Informative)

    by emilv (847905) on Friday September 06, 2013 @10:32AM (#44775215)

    Indeed. And accessing using HTTPS isn't even guaranteeing anything in this browser since the proxy service and the browser is provided by the same party, so they can trivially add their own CA and sign certificates for whatever sites they want.

  • Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 06, 2013 @10:40AM (#44775287)

    I see nowhere on their site where the source code is available. That's just a scummy move.

  • by FunPika (1551249) on Friday September 06, 2013 @12:44PM (#44776867) Journal
    Wrong, Firefox is open source. IceWeasel exists to allow the Debian developers to backport security fixes to the stable version in the Debian repositories and avoid Mozilla's trademark restrictions on the use of Firefox's logo and name. All of the code that makes up what Mozilla officially considers Firefox is freely licensed.
  • Re:Private Browsing (Score:3, Informative)

    by Derek Pomery (2028) on Friday September 06, 2013 @01:35PM (#44777487)

    I was kinda curious what he meant, myself, so I checked out this old-ish paper.
    http://crypto.stanford.edu/~dabo/pubs/papers/privatebrowsing.pdf [stanford.edu]

    I don't know if things have changed much, but their fairly thorough review seems to indicate firefox and chrome are pretty similar.
    Looking at their table, one possible area of concern they listed (that Chrome might no longer have a problem with) is zoom level.
    That could give information to a site that it is the same person, if they cared, although, that seems to be a pretty minor leak, given all the other information you could be revealing even if you hid your IP (a la panopticlick).
    Looks like Chrome retains it from the non-private session, Firefox does not. The download list thing doesn't seem like a big deal. Depends on what you're using it for I guess.

    Some leaks they fixed...
    http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=3493 [google.com]
    http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=21341 [google.com]

    Open issues:
    http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=867 [google.com]
    http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=34593 [google.com] (I'm not a fan of this one either, but multiple private windows in Firefox do the same thing)

    Back in 2010 Flash added support for private browsing in their plugin (that is, wrt local storage) in Firefox. I have no idea if/when that got added to Chrome.

    I saw one complaint that disabled plugins (like Flash) in Chrome were reactivated in Incognito, but I don't know enough about the browser to check that.

    Anyway, they seem pretty similar to me.

  • by hairyfeet (841228) <.bassbeast1968. .at. .gmail.com.> on Friday September 06, 2013 @01:49PM (#44777669) Journal

    Uhhh...Comodo is an Indian company that does enterprise security products, don't know where you got your info from. they have a branch in the USA but more large corps do, that don't make 'em a US company.

    I've personally been using them a couple of years now and have yet to see their browsers send a single bit of data I didn't specifically authorize and I do check my logs. If you opt in for their secure DNS then your DNS will naturally go through their servers (the same ones that they use for corporate deployments so its not like your data will be segregated, it'll be in the same pool as thousands of corps) and as far as their certs go? They had a break in, reported it to the public within a day and had the keys revoked upon finding out about the breach. personally I'd rather have a corp that admits when there is a breach, informs me, and then does everything they can to close the breach immediately than to have one that covers it up, but maybe that is just me. Again not like you don't have options and you can always build from source if none of them suit you.

CCI Power 6/40: one board, a megabyte of cache, and an attitude...

Working...