29 ms·

Show HN: We launched a new web browser

203 points by ca98am79 4y ago

My company launched a new open source web browser built on Chromium. It supports decentralized domains on Handshake and is the first browser to support .eth DNS. It is also the first browser to support secure web browsing with DANE. Check it out: https://impervious.com/beacon https://impervious.com/beacon https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon

lsferreira42 4y ago
It's surprising that nobody mentions theoldreader: https://theoldreader.com/ https://theoldreader.com/ it's kinda like the old google rss reader and works really really well!
cowtools 4y ago
Why not a web extension? Why use a ENS/Namecoin versus a petname solution like GNS? I like the idea of such a browser integration, but I don't see this actually being used. Perhaps you could have upstreamed those as experimental features in firefox/Torbrowser. Edit: I suppose you could upstream it to brave, they are very crypto-friendly. Also, no Linux support? Edit 2: Most of my points have been made moot by this: https://impervious.com/fingertip https://impervious.com/fingertip
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
CharlesW 4y ago
Is this just technically interesting? If it's more than that, what are the benefits for me?
userbinator 4y ago
built on Chromium If only Firefox(Gecko) would get some more attention...
- jjcon 4y ago
  Why exactly? I honestly do not understand HN fascination with Firefox. Firefox isn't even in the top 3 browsers anymore and has about the same Marketshare as Samsung internet. It is irrelevant at this point. Blink is the standard for rendering now just as Linux is the standard for web servers.
  - ajdude 4y ago
    > Firefox isn't even in the top 3 browsers anymore and has about the same Marketshare as Samsung internet This is precisely the issue. The fact that Google has such a mass control over Internet rendering means that they are free to write their own standards with absolutely no pushback. It is essentially an Internet explorer situation, whereas if Google wants something to work a certain way, you have no choice but to adapt it least certain websites won’t work. I don’t think a single commercial entity — let alone one with such a disastrous privacy record whose primary source of income is advertising — should be able to strongarm the Internet like it currently can.
    - encryptluks2 4y ago
      If Firefox wasn't so sluggish maybe more people would use it.
      - yangcheng 4y ago
      - pipeline_peak 4y ago
        That’s a big if, Mozilla has been declining for a long time. They don’t have the funding to progress their aging codebase. Firing everyone in the name of Wokeness hasn’t helped.
    - zdragnar 4y ago
      Globally, Safari is #2 on mobile, and in the US specifically, #1. Even on desktop, Safari has a fairly strong showing. Apple and Mozilla have basically just swapped places when it comes to keeping developers in check wrt adopting chrome-only features. I don't know that more people using FF would change much at this point, to be honest.
- pipeline_peak 4y ago
  They’ve gotten plenty of attention. No one wants to build off a sluggish browser.
- mdaniel 4y ago
  And that goes double for trying to bootstrap a new protocol; I can only presume the Tor Browser is built on top of Firefox for a reason
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- err4nt 4y ago
  There's a reason: legitimate performance differences that exist between them.
- journey_16162 4y ago
  Maybe it would if it had a more permissive license.
throwaway2016a 4y ago
Congrats on the launch. I think this indirectly slowed down the foreverdomains server with the HN traffic. Since you advertise "decentralized internet" vs blockchain, I'd love to see this also support some more non-blockchain protocols such as Dat (https://dat.foundation/ https://dat.foundation/) and IPFS directly. Maybe even Bittorrent and Tor (Onion router). It may already do some of that, I just couldn't tell from your wording.
- lachstar-x 4y ago
  Don't forget the boys at the Oxen network and their Session program. Phenomenal work, better than Tor
  - bogomipz 4y ago
    This looks really interesting. It looks like their lokinet uses an onion router though or am I misinterpreting the "better than Tor" here?
    - 0des 4y ago
      Isn't Loki the same cryptonote fork that forked signal to remove the phone requirement and then called it better than signal?
  - wolverine876 4y ago
    > better than Tor In what ways does it compare? > the boys I hope it's a much bigger world than that!
  - fs111 4y ago
    > Phenomenal work, better than Tor Citation needed
- grkvlt 4y ago
  <https://dat.foundation/ https://dat.foundation/> is apparently deprecated in favour of <https://dat-ecosystem.org/ https://dat-ecosystem.org/> which is impressive since it only became the dat foundation in december 2019 ...
mdaniel 4y ago
Why are you swallowing "error" from invoking the "reall" tool? That seems like a great way to make contributors really frustrated: https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/butil/main.go#L54 https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/... and again https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/realbutil/main.go#L123 https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/... This trend of "I'm going to invent some build tool because there are not enough build tools in the world" is evidently leaking out of the node ecosystem For clarity, I did see that this was inspired by the brave-browser model, but of the ones to draw inspiration from, that's for sure not it given that their CI is closed source and they're trying to use npm in lieu of a more structured, comprehensible system I like trying out alternate browsers, so congratulations on the launch, and I'll for sure try to build it, but I wanted to draw these to your attention because my experience with software is that error handling is about 80% of the job
- buffrr 4y ago
  > Why are you swallowing "error" from invoking the "reall" tool? That seems like a great way to make contributors really frustrated Glad you're looking at the code! There's still some refactoring needed for butil. It will get more polished soon ;) > This trend of "I'm going to invent some build tool because there are not enough build tools in the world" is evidently leaking out of the node ecosystem butil applies string replacements, patches and overrides all under one tool using a statically typed language but still usable like a scripting lang since it can rebuild the actual tool as needed. You can technically do something similar with various python scripts I suppose and use chromium's GN build system . GN would just end up calling various scripts so I think i prefer this more unless you have some other ideas.
  - mdaniel 4y ago
    It may be "statically typed" but from a consumer's PoV, 100% opaque. My first question when trying to build any project is "what is this going to do to my machine" and with some golang based build system, you're asking for a lot of trust on two different levels: 1. go install something (so now I need to read its source) 2. oh, turns out it actually delegates to an entirely separate binary that I now need to separately read And I hear you about "but scripting!!1", however, using one of the existing tools means there is a non-zero chance of someone having experience with them and maybe even having reasonable editor support for it It's your project, so I know I'm just some rando on the Internet, but I wanted to make sure you were choosing the contribution path you wanted to build upon, and not just hacking something together for expedience that then has to be unwound later. In this specific case, that goes double because it already has tight coupling to GN due to Chromium
srinathkrishna 4y ago
Curious to know your team size and engineering challenges with building this on Chromium. Also, did you consider WebKit or Gecko?
omoikane 4y ago
Not to be confused with the other impervious browser: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30968715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30968715
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- mdaniel 4y ago
  Yikes, what a naming collision given the "blockchain-y" tone underlying both uses of that name
  - tasuki 4y ago
    To be fair, this one is called Beacon, Impervious is just the name of the developer. Not that much of a collision imo...
brightball 4y ago
DANE is really interesting. Wider adoption would be good for everyone I think. I’m going to have to give this a try.
- dagenix 4y ago
  The problem with DANE is that it doesn't move us away from CAs, it just conflates the role of running a DNS zone with also being a CA. And even CAs may be problematic, the entities running DNS zones are often more so.
  - mike_d 4y ago
    If you own a DNS zone, you should be the only one with the authority to issue certificates for it. That is what Handshake+DANE does.
    - dagenix 4y ago
      Fair enough - I missed the part about Handshake. I don't know much about Handshake, but, if it does what I assume it does, I do see how DANE would make sense in that context. Whether or not Handshake is a good idea I guess is the real discussion point - but, maybe one I'm not too interested in debating, especially given my limited knowledge.
Iwan-Zotow 4y ago
What happens with old web browser?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
andrewmcwatters 4y ago
What problems did you face that made you decide to create a browser fork of Chromium instead of a web browsing extension or a separate application that could utilize any other web browser as a client for using these protocols?
- buffrr 4y ago
  We already built a separate application and wanted to avoid making a browser for a while. The idea for Beacon started when we wanted decent support for iOS and android, which nowadays is like the majority of users. It's easy to install an app and start browsing. No hacks or workarounds and the UX can be much more tailored (even for desktop).
krono 4y ago
Neat and some interesting todo/roadmap items too! Will be keeping an eye on this. Random thought, perhaps for later: some form of keyboard-centric navigation functionality - boosts your UX differentiation and it likely speaks to your target audience. Something along the lines of Nyxt browser[1] or the popular Vimium extension[2]. [1] https://nyxt.atlas.engineer/ https://nyxt.atlas.engineer/ [2] https://github.com/philc/vimium https://github.com/philc/vimium
cryptonector 4y ago
I can already imagine the DNSSEC/DANE naysayers' complaints. I don't care, I love this.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jagger27 4y ago
All the .eth crap makes me gag and recoil, but DANE seems worth investigating.
- everfree 4y ago
  Why do blockchain-based name systems (or ENS specifically) make you "gag and recoil?"
  - jagger27 4y ago
    Proof of stake for one, and the cult it’s built on. Shouldn’t need to be said.
    - everfree 4y ago
      I think it does need to be said. Nobody can engage with your opinions if you don't express them.
freediver 4y ago
What is your vision of the web and how does the current browsers' default search engine fit into that vision?
yakubin 4y ago
> It is also the first browser to support secure web browsing with DANE. Props for that. I wish we moved away from CAs.
- cryptonector 4y ago
  You get CAs with DNSSEC/DANE, just not PKIX CAs (though you can have those too).
- heavyset_go 4y ago
  Agreed. I don't like the trend of devices, especially IoT devices, that bake in support for CAs without supporting other certificates or allowing you to adjust their trust stores. Real attempts at decentralization away from CAs might force companies to change how their devices deal with certificates and trust, hopefully putting power back in the hands of device owners.
fartcannon 4y ago
This is the kind of thing Linux users like.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  ...but cannot use, as of now.
sqwrell 4y ago
Linux version for Mint? Mail list for updates? Thanks
mr-pink 4y ago
i would like an open source browser that shares data collected from all its users. so the public can have access to the types of data google et al have.
- autoexec 4y ago
  > i would like an open source browser that shares data collected from all its users. so the public can have access to the types of data google et al have. That sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. The public once got a hold of a sample of the anonymized searches of AOL customers and it didn't take long for individuals to get identified. The amount of data google has on people goes far beyond the things they search for or the sites they visit. A web browser that publishes everyone's browsing habits for the public would also get collected by data brokers and 'google et al' to be exploited for their own gain. Who would sign up to use that? I'm pretty sure that if the data google has were ever made available to the public, as soon as the first congress person reviewed their own dossier we'd see laws passed very quickly banning the use of that data and perhaps even preventing it from being collected in the first place. I imagine any popular browser or project exposing their users similarly would have the same problem.
  - mr-pink 4y ago
    either the data collection should be banned or everyone should have access. why should monopolies like google and those who can afford access to data brokers get to extend their power indefinitely? why do people support snowden's leaks but no one is leaking similar shit from google? it can be a payment for releasing your data publicly if people don't want to give it up for free.
    - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
      You're right, it should be banned. It should not be legal to covertly(through trackers running on every website, effectively spyware) catalogue people's browsing habits like that. Although I'll give you this. A massive leak might stir up the public outrage necessary to convince the US Congress to actually do something about it.
quickthrower2 4y ago
I have a question about blockchain DNS's. This might be the time to ask! There is a centralization aspect in any DNS, blockchain or otherwise in that, literally to be useful, there needs to be consensus about which chain operators own which .{name} extensions for a given name. Which makes financial incentive for say an investor to 'bribe' browsers into using their DNS, which then charges money to end users, which er... feels a lot like the DNS we have. I think that "true" decentralization might come from nameless "domain". If a domain is a SHA256 hash with no name, then with QR Codes and search engines and hyperlinks it doesn't matter as much that they are not memorable (we managed with nameless phone numbers, right!). Hash providers can be any chain, and then your job as a browser is to add as many mainstream chains as possible (there is no need to decide who is the 'official' one, or rank them, so Ethereum is no better than Dogecoin) as hash collisions are practically impossible.
- azophy_2 4y ago
  we already have "nameless" IP addresses, in which DNS is built on top of it as abstraction. using SHA256 is no better that using IPv6 IMO
  - webmaven 4y ago
    There is probably a decent case to be made for having an indirection layer above IP addresses, even if they are as meaningless and unmemorizable as a hash: for portability (IP addresses are tied to the host infra provider), load balancing, etc.
    - mdoms 4y ago
      We already have that.
      - ahtihn 4y ago
        Do we? Where can I buy an IP address? Do all hosting providers support assigning an arbitrary IP address to a website? Let's say I have a hosted wordpress blog with a custom domain. How do I get a static IP for it?
jlgaddis 4y ago
Let me guess: your company ultimately profits somehow, whether directly or indirectly, from the use ("sale", presumably) of these "decentralized domains" and/or ".eth DNS"?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
keyle 4y ago
Could you please update your page with more information?
bogomipz 4y ago
Wow congrats on the launch! This looks really exciting.
bogomipz 4y ago
I apologize if this a naive question but a lot of this is new to me - are Forever domains and ENS and Handshake all complimentary or are they alternatives to each other? Might anyone have any good resources for blockchain DNS they could share?
- tasuki 4y ago
  Forever domains are built on Handshake. Handshake is an attempt at a decentralized DNS root zone. ENS is a different, independent project. I guess the Handshake people will make sure .eth (the ENS suffix) resolves to ENS on Handshake. Handshake would like to eclipse everything :)
mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
Yet Another Chromium Fork. In a way, it's almost a shame Chrome was open sourced through Chromium. Maybe if it weren't, we'd have a healthier, more diverse browser ecosystem.
- Aeolun 4y ago
  As much as I lament the same thing. I think it’s more likely we’d just have nothing.
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
    Maybe. There's no way to tell, of course.
    - runjake 4y ago
      Well, we could look at history. For example, Internet Explorer’s former dominance.
  - yywwbbn 4y ago
    I doubt Chrome would be in a position it is if it wasn’t open source. After all blink just started off as a fork of webkit (which was a fork of KHTML..). Had they had to build a browser from scratch it would had taken them years to have something that could compete with IE, FF and Safari. Also Apple didn’t seem to be very interested in promoting the Windows version of Safari, so it was basically the only webkit browser most people would even has access to.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  Writing a browser from scratch is hard.
  - Gigachad 4y ago
    Hard is underselling it. At this point it’s borderline impossible. It’s unlikely we will ever see a new browser.
mdoms 4y ago
Why would I want .eth DNS? What is DANE? Not really selling it here.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- thrownaway561 4y ago
  my thoughts exactly... this seems like a browser targeted for a specific audience. my guess would be the crypto community.
Melatonic 4y ago
Handshake has looked interesting for awhile now but what is the point of a blockchain based DNS? Isn't a big selling point of DNS having the fastest possible response times?
- sk55 4y ago
  Using blockchain prevents the domain from being seized. This is helpful for service providers so they can maintain uptime and it also helps users who might rely on a service.
  - ahtihn 4y ago
    It also means you can lose control of your domain permanently if you make any mistakes with your keys.
- mike_d 4y ago
  The lookups are near instant just like regular DNS, it just becomes un-censorable and not controlled by a central body.
- lifty 4y ago
  I had a bit of a disappointing moment recently when I found out that only top level domains are uncensorable in handshake. Such a let down.
  - kelthuzad 4y ago
    Since everybody including you, can own as many top level domains as your heart desires, this should be no problem.
- jillesvangurp 4y ago
  No, the selling point of DNS is mainly that everybody knows how to work with this bit of technology from the 1970s. Mostly it's fast because modern implementations do a lot of caching and only occasionally query parents in their hierarchy. You can use the same strategy to make pretty much any alternative implementation fast as well. And of course slapping some sort of DNS compatible facade on that is not rocket science either. So, you don't even lose the backwards compatibility. Better still, you can fall back to existing DNS too. The key challenge with DNS is that it is hierarchical and that there's a root with an owner. That owner is an entity that we just have to trust to do the right things in terms of certificates, security, not censoring entries, implementing fair policies for allocating names, etc. Whether you trust the current owners is of course a bit political. Mostly I have no big issues with that myself but it is annoying to have to bribe certain companies for the privilege of using our registered trademark as a domain name. Literally the only service these companies deliver is 'maintaining' a record of that. A blockchain can replace this with distributed ownership of a tamper proof ledger of ownership of domain names. Building an index of these names is not that hard. Any old search engine or database can do that. But the key part is administering ownership in a fair and transparent way. It's one of those use cases where using a blockchain actually makes sense without devolving into some pyramid scheme for creating lots of wealth for some. When you think about it, existing DNS works exactly like a pyramid scheme (by design even). Millions of people are paying in the order of 10$ a year for a cheap database record in an ancient hierarchical database. The only value these companies deliver is monopolizing ownership of common endings like .com, .io, etc. And the only reason we need those is because it's an ancient hierarchical database. With a blockchain, we get rid of those companies and potentially also the top level domains. I see no reason why google, twitter, etc. could not be top level domains.
hulitu 4y ago
Based on chromium, looks like chromium. No thanks.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
jollybean 4y ago
Is DNS really a problem with respect to 'centralization'? Where is the harm being caused? Where are the risks of harm? What are systematic negative effects? And if those can be articulated, are blockchain resolutions a solution to those problems?
nikolay 4y ago
A Chromium fork, which could've been an extension or a companion app. No thank you!
WorthCommenting 4y ago
You could have very well built an extension for this..
hrbf 4y ago
This is an honest question because I really don’t get it: what problem does this solve, especially with regard to “distributed domains”?
- jesprenj 4y ago
  DANE is a really big deal. It removes the dependency on TLS certificate authorities so self signed certificates can be used and verified via records, published in DNS and signed with DNSSEC. Though I have greater concerns regarding privacy of the new browser. Is it like ungoogled-chromium? DANE should really be merged into upstream chromium.
  - hrbf 4y ago
    Interesting idea. This can be done with the existing DNS infrastructure I believe. It really sounds like a workable solution.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- kelthuzad 4y ago
  The first thing I would think of is not having to trust random certificate authorities, which would avoid incidents like this [0]. Another problem with the current state of the web was explained in an article I read a few days ago [1]. [0]: https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/how-the-2011-hack-of-diginotar-changed-the-internets-infrastructure.html https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/how-the-2011-hack-of-di... [1]: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more-expensive-00023524 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more...
  - hrbf 4y ago
    An interesting thought. This relates to DANE if I understand correctly. This can work on existing infrastructure. But what about this “distributed domains“ thing though? Unless I’m understanding it wrong, there’s blockchain technology involved. Why?
daenz 4y ago
Congrats on your accomplishment! However, I will never use it because a browser is one of those really important information gateways that I want to be very sure is not compromised.
- kelthuzad 4y ago
  - raesene9 4y ago
    Unfortunately, the number of people qualified and with the time to do a source code review of something as complex as a browser, is very small. For the vast majority of users that's not a realistic prospect...
    - jedimind 4y ago
      So you're saying that either way he has to trust someone. Then why not trust a company which at least open sources their code so anyone who has an interest in auditing the software can do so? (or have experts audit it for them,[who they also need to trust]) Yet people seem to trust google without batting an eye? "Google fired dozens of employees from 2018 to 2020 for accessing users' personal data." https://www.businessinsider.com/google-fired-employees-abusing-user-data-sharing-personal-info-vice-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/google-fired-employees-abusi...
      - fsflover 4y ago
        > either way he has to trust someone. Then why not trust a company which at least open sources their code Because the alternative is to trust a company which open sources their code _and_ a lot of security researchers regularly verify the code. > Yet people seem to trust google without batting an eye There are always people who believe in wrong things.
      - charcircuit 4y ago
        I'm not sure what you expect Google to do? Permission to access personal data was limited to a small number of Google employees and when they abused their power they were fired. Do you want them to have some sort of AI that guesses the intent of looking at personal data?
xchip 4y ago
You launched a version of chrome, not a new web browser :/
- sofixa 4y ago
  Eh. People say "a new OS" when talking about a new Linux based distro. A new Chromium based browser is apt. I think the ship has sailed and we won't have a new browser from scratch any time soon. If two of the richest companies in the world can't do it ( Apple's Safari is always late with features, has significant bugs; MS abandoned their Edge), who could and why? What would be the value add over just using Chromium? It'd be a massive undertaking which you can't profit off because the competition is free. PS: I'd like someone like the EU Commission ( for instance in the upcoming Digital Markets Act) to force Google to give away Chromium to an independent committee. It is the basis for Internet consumption, it shouldn't be in the hands of a single company.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    > we won't have a new browser from scratch any time soon What about Flow? It's a a clean-slate closed-source browser and engine, designed to make effective use of parallelism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(web_browser) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(web_browser)
    - iforgotpassword 4y ago
      > closed-source Aaaand I'm out. Still not over Opera abandoning presto. With open source there's at least a chance it can be continued by someone else.
      - jefftk 4y ago
        I would also prefer to see it be open source, but I think in this context that's not the point? My parent was saying that they do not expect to see new browsers from scratch, and this is one. Aside: you could make the argument that both Chrome and Safari are only open source because they were not built from scratch.
ZeroGravitas 4y ago
Do any of the Chrome forks explicitly work together? The standard IT pattern seems to be a dominant corporation vs a ragtag of small groups. The browsers wars have already gone through this cycle and the ragtag group won the last time. But there were also lots of speciality browsers built on IE and it's hard to tell where any new Chrome fork browser stands.
- toper-centage 4y ago
  Imagine a world where Microsoft, Mozilla, Google, Apple were cooperating and building interconnecting blocks of a modern browser since the early 2000s. Instead, MS discontinued Edge, Mozilla has only 2% market share (still big in global terms), and 90% of the internet traffic is basically running on Chrome. No innovation is possible that is not in-line with the direction the upstream, or at the increasing cost of constant catching up to updates.
drosan 4y ago
infologics 4y ago
[dead]
snshn 4y ago
No GNU/Linux?
fuz5643653 4y ago
pluc 4y ago
That's great! Do you think your product will lead to more companies creating Chrome-based browser forks? Cause there's about 20, I can't wait for more Chrome-based variety!
sprash 4y ago
Will there be namecoin support?
titaniumtown 4y ago
Oh god another chromium fork.

203 points by ca98am79 4y ago

lsferreira42 4y ago

It's surprising that nobody mentions theoldreader: https://theoldreader.com/ https://theoldreader.com/ it's kinda like the old google rss reader and works really really well!

cowtools 4y ago

Why not a web extension? Why use a ENS/Namecoin versus a petname solution like GNS? I like the idea of such a browser integration, but I don't see this actually being used. Perhaps you could have upstreamed those as experimental features in firefox/Torbrowser. Edit: I suppose you could upstream it to brave, they are very crypto-friendly. Also, no Linux support? Edit 2: Most of my points have been made moot by this: https://impervious.com/fingertip https://impervious.com/fingertip

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

CharlesW 4y ago

Is this just technically interesting? If it's more than that, what are the benefits for me?

userbinator 4y ago

built on Chromium If only Firefox(Gecko) would get some more attention...

jjcon 4y ago
Why exactly? I honestly do not understand HN fascination with Firefox. Firefox isn't even in the top 3 browsers anymore and has about the same Marketshare as Samsung internet. It is irrelevant at this point. Blink is the standard for rendering now just as Linux is the standard for web servers.
- ajdude 4y ago
  > Firefox isn't even in the top 3 browsers anymore and has about the same Marketshare as Samsung internet This is precisely the issue. The fact that Google has such a mass control over Internet rendering means that they are free to write their own standards with absolutely no pushback. It is essentially an Internet explorer situation, whereas if Google wants something to work a certain way, you have no choice but to adapt it least certain websites won’t work. I don’t think a single commercial entity — let alone one with such a disastrous privacy record whose primary source of income is advertising — should be able to strongarm the Internet like it currently can.
  - encryptluks2 4y ago
    If Firefox wasn't so sluggish maybe more people would use it.
    - yangcheng 4y ago
    - pipeline_peak 4y ago
      That’s a big if, Mozilla has been declining for a long time. They don’t have the funding to progress their aging codebase. Firing everyone in the name of Wokeness hasn’t helped.
  - zdragnar 4y ago
    Globally, Safari is #2 on mobile, and in the US specifically, #1. Even on desktop, Safari has a fairly strong showing. Apple and Mozilla have basically just swapped places when it comes to keeping developers in check wrt adopting chrome-only features. I don't know that more people using FF would change much at this point, to be honest.
pipeline_peak 4y ago
They’ve gotten plenty of attention. No one wants to build off a sluggish browser.
mdaniel 4y ago
And that goes double for trying to bootstrap a new protocol; I can only presume the Tor Browser is built on top of Firefox for a reason
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
err4nt 4y ago
There's a reason: legitimate performance differences that exist between them.
journey_16162 4y ago
Maybe it would if it had a more permissive license.

throwaway2016a 4y ago

Congrats on the launch. I think this indirectly slowed down the foreverdomains server with the HN traffic. Since you advertise "decentralized internet" vs blockchain, I'd love to see this also support some more non-blockchain protocols such as Dat (https://dat.foundation/ https://dat.foundation/) and IPFS directly. Maybe even Bittorrent and Tor (Onion router). It may already do some of that, I just couldn't tell from your wording.

lachstar-x 4y ago
Don't forget the boys at the Oxen network and their Session program. Phenomenal work, better than Tor
- bogomipz 4y ago
  This looks really interesting. It looks like their lokinet uses an onion router though or am I misinterpreting the "better than Tor" here?
  - 0des 4y ago
    Isn't Loki the same cryptonote fork that forked signal to remove the phone requirement and then called it better than signal?
- wolverine876 4y ago
  > better than Tor In what ways does it compare? > the boys I hope it's a much bigger world than that!
- fs111 4y ago
  > Phenomenal work, better than Tor Citation needed
grkvlt 4y ago
<https://dat.foundation/ https://dat.foundation/> is apparently deprecated in favour of <https://dat-ecosystem.org/ https://dat-ecosystem.org/> which is impressive since it only became the dat foundation in december 2019 ...

mdaniel 4y ago

Why are you swallowing "error" from invoking the "reall" tool? That seems like a great way to make contributors really frustrated: https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/butil/main.go#L54 https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/... and again https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/realbutil/main.go#L123 https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon/blob/main/tools/src/... This trend of "I'm going to invent some build tool because there are not enough build tools in the world" is evidently leaking out of the node ecosystem For clarity, I did see that this was inspired by the brave-browser model, but of the ones to draw inspiration from, that's for sure not it given that their CI is closed source and they're trying to use npm in lieu of a more structured, comprehensible system I like trying out alternate browsers, so congratulations on the launch, and I'll for sure try to build it, but I wanted to draw these to your attention because my experience with software is that error handling is about 80% of the job

buffrr 4y ago
> Why are you swallowing "error" from invoking the "reall" tool? That seems like a great way to make contributors really frustrated Glad you're looking at the code! There's still some refactoring needed for butil. It will get more polished soon ;) > This trend of "I'm going to invent some build tool because there are not enough build tools in the world" is evidently leaking out of the node ecosystem butil applies string replacements, patches and overrides all under one tool using a statically typed language but still usable like a scripting lang since it can rebuild the actual tool as needed. You can technically do something similar with various python scripts I suppose and use chromium's GN build system . GN would just end up calling various scripts so I think i prefer this more unless you have some other ideas.
- mdaniel 4y ago
  It may be "statically typed" but from a consumer's PoV, 100% opaque. My first question when trying to build any project is "what is this going to do to my machine" and with some golang based build system, you're asking for a lot of trust on two different levels: 1. go install something (so now I need to read its source) 2. oh, turns out it actually delegates to an entirely separate binary that I now need to separately read And I hear you about "but scripting!!1", however, using one of the existing tools means there is a non-zero chance of someone having experience with them and maybe even having reasonable editor support for it It's your project, so I know I'm just some rando on the Internet, but I wanted to make sure you were choosing the contribution path you wanted to build upon, and not just hacking something together for expedience that then has to be unwound later. In this specific case, that goes double because it already has tight coupling to GN due to Chromium

srinathkrishna 4y ago

Curious to know your team size and engineering challenges with building this on Chromium. Also, did you consider WebKit or Gecko?

omoikane 4y ago

Not to be confused with the other impervious browser: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30968715 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30968715

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mdaniel 4y ago
Yikes, what a naming collision given the "blockchain-y" tone underlying both uses of that name
- tasuki 4y ago
  To be fair, this one is called Beacon, Impervious is just the name of the developer. Not that much of a collision imo...

brightball 4y ago

DANE is really interesting. Wider adoption would be good for everyone I think. I’m going to have to give this a try.

dagenix 4y ago
The problem with DANE is that it doesn't move us away from CAs, it just conflates the role of running a DNS zone with also being a CA. And even CAs may be problematic, the entities running DNS zones are often more so.
- mike_d 4y ago
  If you own a DNS zone, you should be the only one with the authority to issue certificates for it. That is what Handshake+DANE does.
  - dagenix 4y ago
    Fair enough - I missed the part about Handshake. I don't know much about Handshake, but, if it does what I assume it does, I do see how DANE would make sense in that context. Whether or not Handshake is a good idea I guess is the real discussion point - but, maybe one I'm not too interested in debating, especially given my limited knowledge.

Iwan-Zotow 4y ago

What happens with old web browser?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

andrewmcwatters 4y ago

What problems did you face that made you decide to create a browser fork of Chromium instead of a web browsing extension or a separate application that could utilize any other web browser as a client for using these protocols?

buffrr 4y ago
We already built a separate application and wanted to avoid making a browser for a while. The idea for Beacon started when we wanted decent support for iOS and android, which nowadays is like the majority of users. It's easy to install an app and start browsing. No hacks or workarounds and the UX can be much more tailored (even for desktop).

krono 4y ago

Neat and some interesting todo/roadmap items too! Will be keeping an eye on this. Random thought, perhaps for later: some form of keyboard-centric navigation functionality - boosts your UX differentiation and it likely speaks to your target audience. Something along the lines of Nyxt browser[1] or the popular Vimium extension[2]. [1] https://nyxt.atlas.engineer/ https://nyxt.atlas.engineer/ [2] https://github.com/philc/vimium https://github.com/philc/vimium

cryptonector 4y ago

I can already imagine the DNSSEC/DANE naysayers' complaints. I don't care, I love this.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jagger27 4y ago

All the .eth crap makes me gag and recoil, but DANE seems worth investigating.

everfree 4y ago
Why do blockchain-based name systems (or ENS specifically) make you "gag and recoil?"
- jagger27 4y ago
  Proof of stake for one, and the cult it’s built on. Shouldn’t need to be said.
  - everfree 4y ago
    I think it does need to be said. Nobody can engage with your opinions if you don't express them.

freediver 4y ago

What is your vision of the web and how does the current browsers' default search engine fit into that vision?

yakubin 4y ago

> It is also the first browser to support secure web browsing with DANE. Props for that. I wish we moved away from CAs.

cryptonector 4y ago
You get CAs with DNSSEC/DANE, just not PKIX CAs (though you can have those too).
heavyset_go 4y ago
Agreed. I don't like the trend of devices, especially IoT devices, that bake in support for CAs without supporting other certificates or allowing you to adjust their trust stores. Real attempts at decentralization away from CAs might force companies to change how their devices deal with certificates and trust, hopefully putting power back in the hands of device owners.

fartcannon 4y ago

This is the kind of thing Linux users like.

smoldesu 4y ago
...but cannot use, as of now.

sqwrell 4y ago

Linux version for Mint? Mail list for updates? Thanks

mr-pink 4y ago

i would like an open source browser that shares data collected from all its users. so the public can have access to the types of data google et al have.

autoexec 4y ago
> i would like an open source browser that shares data collected from all its users. so the public can have access to the types of data google et al have. That sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. The public once got a hold of a sample of the anonymized searches of AOL customers and it didn't take long for individuals to get identified. The amount of data google has on people goes far beyond the things they search for or the sites they visit. A web browser that publishes everyone's browsing habits for the public would also get collected by data brokers and 'google et al' to be exploited for their own gain. Who would sign up to use that? I'm pretty sure that if the data google has were ever made available to the public, as soon as the first congress person reviewed their own dossier we'd see laws passed very quickly banning the use of that data and perhaps even preventing it from being collected in the first place. I imagine any popular browser or project exposing their users similarly would have the same problem.
- mr-pink 4y ago
  either the data collection should be banned or everyone should have access. why should monopolies like google and those who can afford access to data brokers get to extend their power indefinitely? why do people support snowden's leaks but no one is leaking similar shit from google? it can be a payment for releasing your data publicly if people don't want to give it up for free.
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
    You're right, it should be banned. It should not be legal to covertly(through trackers running on every website, effectively spyware) catalogue people's browsing habits like that. Although I'll give you this. A massive leak might stir up the public outrage necessary to convince the US Congress to actually do something about it.

quickthrower2 4y ago

I have a question about blockchain DNS's. This might be the time to ask! There is a centralization aspect in any DNS, blockchain or otherwise in that, literally to be useful, there needs to be consensus about which chain operators own which .{name} extensions for a given name. Which makes financial incentive for say an investor to 'bribe' browsers into using their DNS, which then charges money to end users, which er... feels a lot like the DNS we have. I think that "true" decentralization might come from nameless "domain". If a domain is a SHA256 hash with no name, then with QR Codes and search engines and hyperlinks it doesn't matter as much that they are not memorable (we managed with nameless phone numbers, right!). Hash providers can be any chain, and then your job as a browser is to add as many mainstream chains as possible (there is no need to decide who is the 'official' one, or rank them, so Ethereum is no better than Dogecoin) as hash collisions are practically impossible.

azophy_2 4y ago
we already have "nameless" IP addresses, in which DNS is built on top of it as abstraction. using SHA256 is no better that using IPv6 IMO
- webmaven 4y ago
  There is probably a decent case to be made for having an indirection layer above IP addresses, even if they are as meaningless and unmemorizable as a hash: for portability (IP addresses are tied to the host infra provider), load balancing, etc.
  - mdoms 4y ago
    We already have that.
    - ahtihn 4y ago
      Do we? Where can I buy an IP address? Do all hosting providers support assigning an arbitrary IP address to a website? Let's say I have a hosted wordpress blog with a custom domain. How do I get a static IP for it?

jlgaddis 4y ago

Let me guess: your company ultimately profits somehow, whether directly or indirectly, from the use ("sale", presumably) of these "decentralized domains" and/or ".eth DNS"?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

keyle 4y ago

Could you please update your page with more information?

bogomipz 4y ago

Wow congrats on the launch! This looks really exciting.

bogomipz 4y ago

I apologize if this a naive question but a lot of this is new to me - are Forever domains and ENS and Handshake all complimentary or are they alternatives to each other? Might anyone have any good resources for blockchain DNS they could share?

tasuki 4y ago
Forever domains are built on Handshake. Handshake is an attempt at a decentralized DNS root zone. ENS is a different, independent project. I guess the Handshake people will make sure .eth (the ENS suffix) resolves to ENS on Handshake. Handshake would like to eclipse everything :)

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago

Yet Another Chromium Fork. In a way, it's almost a shame Chrome was open sourced through Chromium. Maybe if it weren't, we'd have a healthier, more diverse browser ecosystem.

Aeolun 4y ago
As much as I lament the same thing. I think it’s more likely we’d just have nothing.
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 4y ago
  Maybe. There's no way to tell, of course.
  - runjake 4y ago
    Well, we could look at history. For example, Internet Explorer’s former dominance.
- yywwbbn 4y ago
  I doubt Chrome would be in a position it is if it wasn’t open source. After all blink just started off as a fork of webkit (which was a fork of KHTML..). Had they had to build a browser from scratch it would had taken them years to have something that could compete with IE, FF and Safari. Also Apple didn’t seem to be very interested in promoting the Windows version of Safari, so it was basically the only webkit browser most people would even has access to.
adamnemecek 4y ago
Writing a browser from scratch is hard.
- Gigachad 4y ago
  Hard is underselling it. At this point it’s borderline impossible. It’s unlikely we will ever see a new browser.

mdoms 4y ago

Why would I want .eth DNS? What is DANE? Not really selling it here.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
thrownaway561 4y ago
my thoughts exactly... this seems like a browser targeted for a specific audience. my guess would be the crypto community.

Melatonic 4y ago

Handshake has looked interesting for awhile now but what is the point of a blockchain based DNS? Isn't a big selling point of DNS having the fastest possible response times?

sk55 4y ago
Using blockchain prevents the domain from being seized. This is helpful for service providers so they can maintain uptime and it also helps users who might rely on a service.
- ahtihn 4y ago
  It also means you can lose control of your domain permanently if you make any mistakes with your keys.
mike_d 4y ago
The lookups are near instant just like regular DNS, it just becomes un-censorable and not controlled by a central body.
lifty 4y ago
I had a bit of a disappointing moment recently when I found out that only top level domains are uncensorable in handshake. Such a let down.
- kelthuzad 4y ago
  Since everybody including you, can own as many top level domains as your heart desires, this should be no problem.
jillesvangurp 4y ago
No, the selling point of DNS is mainly that everybody knows how to work with this bit of technology from the 1970s. Mostly it's fast because modern implementations do a lot of caching and only occasionally query parents in their hierarchy. You can use the same strategy to make pretty much any alternative implementation fast as well. And of course slapping some sort of DNS compatible facade on that is not rocket science either. So, you don't even lose the backwards compatibility. Better still, you can fall back to existing DNS too. The key challenge with DNS is that it is hierarchical and that there's a root with an owner. That owner is an entity that we just have to trust to do the right things in terms of certificates, security, not censoring entries, implementing fair policies for allocating names, etc. Whether you trust the current owners is of course a bit political. Mostly I have no big issues with that myself but it is annoying to have to bribe certain companies for the privilege of using our registered trademark as a domain name. Literally the only service these companies deliver is 'maintaining' a record of that. A blockchain can replace this with distributed ownership of a tamper proof ledger of ownership of domain names. Building an index of these names is not that hard. Any old search engine or database can do that. But the key part is administering ownership in a fair and transparent way. It's one of those use cases where using a blockchain actually makes sense without devolving into some pyramid scheme for creating lots of wealth for some. When you think about it, existing DNS works exactly like a pyramid scheme (by design even). Millions of people are paying in the order of 10$ a year for a cheap database record in an ancient hierarchical database. The only value these companies deliver is monopolizing ownership of common endings like .com, .io, etc. And the only reason we need those is because it's an ancient hierarchical database. With a blockchain, we get rid of those companies and potentially also the top level domains. I see no reason why google, twitter, etc. could not be top level domains.

hulitu 4y ago

Based on chromium, looks like chromium. No thanks.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

jollybean 4y ago

Is DNS really a problem with respect to 'centralization'? Where is the harm being caused? Where are the risks of harm? What are systematic negative effects? And if those can be articulated, are blockchain resolutions a solution to those problems?

nikolay 4y ago

A Chromium fork, which could've been an extension or a companion app. No thank you!

WorthCommenting 4y ago

You could have very well built an extension for this..

hrbf 4y ago

This is an honest question because I really don’t get it: what problem does this solve, especially with regard to “distributed domains”?

jesprenj 4y ago
DANE is a really big deal. It removes the dependency on TLS certificate authorities so self signed certificates can be used and verified via records, published in DNS and signed with DNSSEC. Though I have greater concerns regarding privacy of the new browser. Is it like ungoogled-chromium? DANE should really be merged into upstream chromium.
- hrbf 4y ago
  Interesting idea. This can be done with the existing DNS infrastructure I believe. It really sounds like a workable solution.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kelthuzad 4y ago
The first thing I would think of is not having to trust random certificate authorities, which would avoid incidents like this [0]. Another problem with the current state of the web was explained in an article I read a few days ago [1]. [0]: https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/how-the-2011-hack-of-diginotar-changed-the-internets-infrastructure.html https://slate.com/technology/2016/12/how-the-2011-hack-of-di... [1]: https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more-expensive-00023524 https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/09/website-domain-more...
- hrbf 4y ago
  An interesting thought. This relates to DANE if I understand correctly. This can work on existing infrastructure. But what about this “distributed domains“ thing though? Unless I’m understanding it wrong, there’s blockchain technology involved. Why?

daenz 4y ago

Congrats on your accomplishment! However, I will never use it because a browser is one of those really important information gateways that I want to be very sure is not compromised.

kelthuzad 4y ago
- raesene9 4y ago
  Unfortunately, the number of people qualified and with the time to do a source code review of something as complex as a browser, is very small. For the vast majority of users that's not a realistic prospect...
  - jedimind 4y ago
    So you're saying that either way he has to trust someone. Then why not trust a company which at least open sources their code so anyone who has an interest in auditing the software can do so? (or have experts audit it for them,[who they also need to trust]) Yet people seem to trust google without batting an eye? "Google fired dozens of employees from 2018 to 2020 for accessing users' personal data." https://www.businessinsider.com/google-fired-employees-abusing-user-data-sharing-personal-info-vice-2021-8 https://www.businessinsider.com/google-fired-employees-abusi...
    - fsflover 4y ago
      > either way he has to trust someone. Then why not trust a company which at least open sources their code Because the alternative is to trust a company which open sources their code _and_ a lot of security researchers regularly verify the code. > Yet people seem to trust google without batting an eye There are always people who believe in wrong things.
    - charcircuit 4y ago
      I'm not sure what you expect Google to do? Permission to access personal data was limited to a small number of Google employees and when they abused their power they were fired. Do you want them to have some sort of AI that guesses the intent of looking at personal data?

xchip 4y ago

You launched a version of chrome, not a new web browser :/

sofixa 4y ago
Eh. People say "a new OS" when talking about a new Linux based distro. A new Chromium based browser is apt. I think the ship has sailed and we won't have a new browser from scratch any time soon. If two of the richest companies in the world can't do it ( Apple's Safari is always late with features, has significant bugs; MS abandoned their Edge), who could and why? What would be the value add over just using Chromium? It'd be a massive undertaking which you can't profit off because the competition is free. PS: I'd like someone like the EU Commission ( for instance in the upcoming Digital Markets Act) to force Google to give away Chromium to an independent committee. It is the basis for Internet consumption, it shouldn't be in the hands of a single company.
- jefftk 4y ago
  > we won't have a new browser from scratch any time soon What about Flow? It's a a clean-slate closed-source browser and engine, designed to make effective use of parallelism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(web_browser) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(web_browser)
  - iforgotpassword 4y ago
    > closed-source Aaaand I'm out. Still not over Opera abandoning presto. With open source there's at least a chance it can be continued by someone else.
    - jefftk 4y ago
      I would also prefer to see it be open source, but I think in this context that's not the point? My parent was saying that they do not expect to see new browsers from scratch, and this is one. Aside: you could make the argument that both Chrome and Safari are only open source because they were not built from scratch.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

Do any of the Chrome forks explicitly work together? The standard IT pattern seems to be a dominant corporation vs a ragtag of small groups. The browsers wars have already gone through this cycle and the ragtag group won the last time. But there were also lots of speciality browsers built on IE and it's hard to tell where any new Chrome fork browser stands.

toper-centage 4y ago
Imagine a world where Microsoft, Mozilla, Google, Apple were cooperating and building interconnecting blocks of a modern browser since the early 2000s. Instead, MS discontinued Edge, Mozilla has only 2% market share (still big in global terms), and 90% of the internet traffic is basically running on Chrome. No innovation is possible that is not in-line with the direction the upstream, or at the increasing cost of constant catching up to updates.

drosan 4y ago

infologics 4y ago

[dead]

snshn 4y ago

No GNU/Linux?

fuz5643653 4y ago

pluc 4y ago

That's great! Do you think your product will lead to more companies creating Chrome-based browser forks? Cause there's about 20, I can't wait for more Chrome-based variety!

sprash 4y ago

Will there be namecoin support?

titaniumtown 4y ago

Oh god another chromium fork.