[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye
From: |
Mark H Weaver |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Mar 2017 22:08:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) |
Go away troll, or else I'll take steps to ban you from this list.
This is your final warning.
Mark
<address@hidden> writes:
> I see what you're doing here, you're playing game of questions with me
> and being very evasive while pretending to have no idea what I am
> talking about, while also simultaneously giving yourself the unfounded
> excuse to back up your own flawed argument that "I'm wrong" for "no
> mentioned facts or reasons" without actually providing evidence that
> supports your claims against me even though I'm the one always
> pointing out the truth because I want people to wake up. How
> convenient that you never show my previous full reply in your messages
> to me so that people find it more difficult to follow this wild goose
> chase back and forth you are trying to play me with. I said it before
> and I'll say it again, if you don't like me for any reason, mark my
> emails as spam. I honestly do not enjoy our interactions and I
> politely request that you Julie, personally mark me as spam once and
> for all. But I know you wont, because that doesn't accomplish your
> goals does it? I'm not sorry and nobody is going to shut me up. I love
> helping people so please I kindly ask that you prove me wrong and
> don't message me again.
>
> 24. Mar 2017 09:01 by address@hidden:
>
> On 03/24/2017 07:09 AM, address@hidden wrote:
>
> I point out your missteps in logic
>
> Where did you do this, and what "missteps in logic" are you talking about?
>
> you suddenly shift your argument if I may call it that to the opposite of
> what you appeared to originally intend to say.
>
> What did you perceive me as originally intending to say, and what part
> of my message made you perceive that?
>
> you don't actually want to provide a logical argument that shows any facts
> and reasons why what I said wasn't good enough for you.
>
> I didn't respond to your email to argue against it. I responded to your
> email to ask you to stop flooding my mailbox, as at the time you had
> sent eight emails in quick succession for no good reason.
>
> I did of course argue against what you were saying, but it's a very
> simple argument that you could easily refute if you are on the side of
> truth:
>
> 1. There is no evidence to support your hypothesis.
>
> 2. There is no reasonable motivation for any known party to do what you
> suggest.
>
> I can't prove that there isn't a conspiracy going on any more than you
> could prove that the tooth fairy isn't real. But you can either show
> evidence that supports your hypothesis, or at least start by showing a
> credible motivation someone could have to want to sabotage IceCat and
> not, say, Tor Browser.
>
> I love it how everyone is mentioning TOR but they all fail to mention the
> important details like how extremely slow it is, the lack of functionality,
> and how many times it has been
> compromised. thanks for the suggestion but I'm very proud of what the
> creators of icecat have done.
>
> Matters of convenience like how fast the browser don't matter in this
> discussion, because if a malicious party wants to sabotage users'
> privacy, they will go for the more popular option no matter how
> convenient it is for the users, and given the lack of attention IceCat
> has gotten anywhere outside of our little circle and the boost in
> attention Tor Browser has gotten from the Snowden revelations, Tor
> Browser appears to be more popular. If you have any evidence to show
> that IceCat is actually more popular than Tor Browser, please feel free
> to present it.
>
> In what way is IceCat more secure than the Tor Browser Bundle? These are
> the facts I can see:
>
> 1. IceCat is frequently behind its upstream, Firefox, on updates.
>
> 2. IceCat includes LibreJS, which selectively stops scripts from
> executing based on the presence or absence of a license statement in a
> particular format. This means that any malicious party can convince
> IceCat to execute JavaScript simply by lying about the license, or
> (because the JavaScript infrastructure doesn't enable forking of a
> website's JavaScript code, and LibreJS doesn't even support blocking any
> scripts it detects as libre) simply making the script libre and keeping
> in the malicious functionality. I explained this in my essay,
> "Proprietary JavaScript: Fix, or Kill?"[1] Therefore, LibreJS cannot
> reliably be protective against any sort of malicious JavaScript code;
> its only protective effect is "security through obscurity".
>
> 3. When using Tor, IceCat blocks all requests for things like images,
> unlike Tor Browser. This makes it possible for any website to
> distinguish between Tor Browser and IceCat simply by embedding an image
> onto the Web page and seeing whether or not the image was sent at the
> time the Web page was loaded.
>
> 4. Other than LibreJS, which (as I explained) can easily be subverted,
> IceCat offers no protection against malicious scripts except for what is
> built into Firefox already. In particular, NoScript is not included.
> Even when it allows all scripts to execute, NoScript provides certain
> security features, such as protection against XSS attacks, which Tor
> Browser benefits from.
>
> 5. IceCat and Tor Browser share the same upstream, Firefox ESR. This
> means that, all other factors being equal, they should share the same
> vulnerabilities. The least vulnerable of the two should be the one that
> gets updated most promptly and most frequently, and that is Tor Browser.
>
> Put together, all of these facts paint a picture that Tor Browser is not
> only more private and more secure than IceCat, but substantially so. If
> you have any evidence to the contrary, please show me what that evidence is.
>
> [1] https://onpon4.github.io/other/kill-js
>
> --
> Julie Marchant
> https://onpon4.github.io
>
> Protect your emails with GnuPG:
> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org
>
>
> --
> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, David Hedlund, 2017/03/18
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/18
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Julie Marchant, 2017/03/18
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, The Canadian Bacon, 2017/03/18
- Message not available
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] Forum rules (ban threats and personal attacks), awakeyet, 2017/03/19
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/19
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Julie Marchant, 2017/03/19
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Julie Marchant, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye,
Mark H Weaver <=
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Ivan Zaigralin, 2017/03/19
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Gary, 2017/03/19
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Gary, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, awakeyet, 2017/03/24
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Gary, 2017/03/25
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Ian Dunn, 2017/03/20
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, bch, 2017/03/20
- Re: [Bug-gnuzilla] I am really getting sick of this. Goodbye, Philipp Schaefermeier, 2017/03/20