MohammadLee

Not so sure that's a good idea. This would prevent users to programmatically compare hashes, and it would be hard to display one next to the other to facilitate comparison. Keep in mind that it is relatively easy to create a file that matches the first and/or last N chars of a hash. And who checks the center of the hash? No, we have to have the browser compare the full hash and give a simple green light to the user. I don't have a proposition in terms of UX but it should be studied (should have been 15 years ago actually)

I totally agree with you, except that asking users multiple times for their password will increase password fatigue. It may be argued that we could prefer the users to mindlessly click on Yes when a popup arises, instead of mindlessly inputting their password. Another option can be timers on the Yes button (like Firefox does), it blocks a few user interface hijacking attacks and gives the user an opportunity to think before they click.

Don't cry man, at least I feel quite confident that these backdoors are efficiently NOBUS

And yet here we are, unable to properly deactivate "features" such as Intel ME.

Sure, it does sound interesting. Now what about all EMET mitigations that Microsoft is deprecating by saying Windows 10 is "secure enough" as is?

I so you are very lucky. 99% of people have to put up with things like this without saying a thing.

From my experience it works actually pretty well, and OPNSense does indeed address the issues the parent posted

I get your point, but I meant that the open source community works because it can leverage on the work from each other. The achievements would be multiplied by the potential reach.

tl;dr: a CVSS 7.8 Windows vulnerability in the SMB service can allow an attacker to DoS any machine with the filesharing service exposed; the possibility of RCE seems to have been discarded; exploits are freely available online. This article complains that Microsoft's communication is lacking details and transparency in times of war

Now imagine what a Linux distribution could achieve with the same budget...

Algo looks good if you stick to IPSEC but WireGuard is years ahead, and much sounder. Considering WireGuard's promising start, imo it's OK if platform support isn't broad yet. You don't need Solaris support to start having your state-of-the art VPN between your servers and workstations.

Thank you for your great work. For me, security is by far the most important selling point. Firefox is a bit late to the party but not that far behind Chrome, as we can see on the competitions and bug bounties (a Chrome 0day is worth more than a Firefox 0day). Please continue to improve the sandboxing, the website permission model for APIs, the security of extensions (auto reviews, permission model), the binary hardening via compilation options, etc. etc. Privacy is good but if any website/ISP/government can compromise your browser, what good is it to not send the URLs you visit to Google? Performance for sure is important but that's not a criteria for me. Again, different user profile I guess!