5 ms·
Which is why I always harden Edge after setting up Windows by disabling SmartScreen
by octosphere 7y ago
Which is why I always harden Edge after setting up Windows by disabling SmartScreen
- bogwog 7y agoor you could just, you know, use Firefox
- ToFab123 7y agoTrue, but nothing beats MS Edge if you have a touch screen and that it a good enough reason for me to stay with Edge.
- ebg13 7y agoCan you save text files that you're looking at in Edge yet? Like if you navigate to a URL that goes https://foo.com/blah.txt https://foo.com/blah.txt can you hit Ctrl+S or right-click on the text page and save the document? The last time I looked at Edge the answer was no.
- stallmanite 7y agoWow how broken is that? Wondering what the heck was the reasoning there.
- currysausage 7y agoI guess that most people who know that you can save web pages to your disk (and make use of that feature) also know that you can disable telemetry (and make use of that feature).
- Santosh83 7y agoSeems like you can't save ANY page in Edge. Absurd lack of functionality.
- derimagia 7y agoFired up Edge Insider (The Chromium version). Works fine.
- Insanity 7y agoYou could just use another browser like Firefox. :)
- ahoka 7y agoAFAIK Mozilla does the same.
- amluto 7y agoNo, it doesn’t. The equivalent Firefox feature does not reveal your URLs to Mozilla. https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-does-phishing-and-malware-protection-work#w_what-information-is-sent-to-mozilla-or-its-partners-when-phishing-and-malware-protection-are-enabled https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/how-does-phishing-and-m...
- jchw 7y agoMozilla does not send full URLs to a third party. As mentioned in the thread, they use “4-byte URL hash prefixes.” Documentation: https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/v4/urls-hashing https://developers.google.com/safe-browsing/v4/urls-hashing (Disclosure: I work for Google but have nothing to do with the safe browsing API.)
- 7373737373 7y agoWait, this is not happening locally, against bloom filters or something?
- est31 7y agoThere is a first step which uses bloom filters, and if the filter gives a result, it is hashed and the hash is sent to the google service to double-check. That being said, a four byte / 32 bit hash is enough to almost uniquely identify a website. There number of 32 bit numbers and websites is roughly the same order of magnitude. It's a problem without a good solution because if you create many collisions then you also generate plenty of sites falsely reported as phishing and which admin would want that to happen on their site. If you avoid creation of collisions, you have this identifyability problem. There is this CRLite proposal [1] using layered bloom filters to stop reliance on web services. Maybe it can be adopted for phishing sites, as well. [1]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7958597 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7958597