Pale Moon - web browser

Submit portable freeware that you find here. It helps if you include information like description, extraction instruction, Unicode support, whether it writes to the registry, and so on.
Message
Author
freakazoid
Posts: 1212
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:45 pm

Re: Pale Moon

#31 Post by freakazoid »

Midas wrote:Since this thread has spawned more browser topics than you could shake a hand at (my exaggeration, I know), it's only fair that the latest browser comparative by Raymond.cc be posted here:
http://www.raymond.cc/blog/battle-of-th ... ory-usage/
FYI, Pale Moon 15.1.1 addressed some issues with CPU performance.
is it stealth? ;)

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Self-Destructing Cookies add-on

#32 Post by Midas »

EDIT: workaround no longer needed as of Pale Moon v24.0!

I have been mostly using Pale Moon since my discovery of it here at TPFC; although I have tried alternatives, what gets me every time is its overall convenience. It might not be the fastest browser but since it's based on Firefox, on the long run it has proved to be the least annoying (if you discount its gargantuan RAM appetite) coupled with an unbeatable customization scope.

But to each, his own; what I want here is to share an add-on related trick that I only recently became aware of. It concerns the Self-Destructing Cookies add-on (now at v0.4.1; http://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox ... g-cookies/), a extremely easy and hassle free tool to enforce a 'do-not-track' cookie policy from the user side without breaking normal site navigation -- something that isn't straightforward at all without it (it's also available on Firefox for Android, and that's where I discovered it).

But if you check the add-on page, you'll notice that it's currently unavailable for later versions of Pale Moon and few will be advised enough to check the FAQ for a workaround (I know I wasn't...):
Q: The add-on does not load properly (aka "nothing happens"). I'm using a re-branded version of Firefox (e.g. IceWeasel, PaleMoon, WaterFox or IceDragon).

A: You are affected by two bugs in the SDK: See #851426 and #855651 on Bugzilla. Until those are resolved upstream, I recommend you install version 0.3.6.1-pre1 and disable automatic updates for this add-on. You can get this version by scrolling to the bottom of this page, expanding the "Version Information" section and clicking on "see complete version history". Get exactly this version: earlier releases are affected by the first bug since they lack the required workaround, and later releases are affected by the second bug since it was introduced in the latest version of the SDK.
I did as instructed (although I don't know how to completely disable its inclusion from the browser 'check for updates' results) and it has been working perfectly. It destroyed over 2000(!) tracking cookies on first run, something one may appreciate even more in the light of the recent scandal of widespread government snooping revealed by Edward Snowdden (e.g., see http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... hp?t=20621).

BEWARE: Self-Destructing Cookies will destroy even cookies you might want to keep (site logins and such) unless you whitelist them. On first run, the browser will display an explanation on how to undo any unwanted cookie destruction, so be sure to read it.
Last edited by Midas on Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:23 am, edited 2 times in total.

freakazoid
Posts: 1212
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:45 pm

Re: Pale Moon

#33 Post by freakazoid »

Thanks for the post, Midas.

I was aware of having to use an older version of SDC with Pale Moon. I have since reverted back to Firefox since the differences between PM and FF were becoming less and less noticeable.

I'll probably check in with Pale Moon every once in a while just to see if the next version of FF is going to piss me off! :)
is it stealth? ;)

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#34 Post by Midas »

DuckDuckGo community interview with the developer of Pale Moon can be read at http://dukgo.com/blog/pale-moon-interview.

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#35 Post by Midas »

I just found this piece of news, which reinforces the imperative of managing browser cookies:
The NSA had a very hard time while tracking down all Tor users and monitoring their traffic, especially since Tor servers are all over the world, but they make tracking easier by adopting the following techniques:
  • By running their own hostile Tor nodes
  • Using zero-day vulnerability of Firefox browser
  • By tracking user' browser Cookies
  • ...
EDIT: A related technical survey...

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 10818
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Pale Moon

#36 Post by webfork »

I just found this piece of news, which reinforces the imperative of managing browser cookies
Probably falls under the Tor or PRISM threads but I agree. I've been looking for a solution to this for a while. The only clear way I could reliably defeat that particular attack was to use one of the LiveCD distributions, since I couldn't find a clear Windows solution to this.

It's a shame too. The chilling effect on journalists and dissidents is going to last a long time.

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#37 Post by Midas »

webfork wrote:Probably falls under the Tor or PRISM threads [...]
I totally agree -- I hesitated for a while, and in the end decided on 'closeness to home', if you get my drift... ;)

I'll see if I can mend that.

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 10818
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Pale Moon

#38 Post by webfork »

After some testing, I felt like things were going well until I went looking for some stats to back up the browser's actual performance rather than just whatever placebo effect caused by running something in a separate window. Can't find any clear benchmarks suggesting pale moon is actually faster (including two that say it may actually be slower):

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/window ... r-windows/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/0 ... tml?page=3

In any case, right now I'm just running a separate instance of Firefox. Again, Haller says specifically not to do this (it's not portable).

User avatar
SYSTEM
Posts: 2041
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:19 am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Re: Pale Moon

#39 Post by SYSTEM »

webfork wrote:After some testing, I felt like things were going well until I went looking for some stats to back up the browser's actual performance rather than just whatever placebo effect caused by running something in a separate window. Can't find any clear benchmarks suggesting pale moon is actually faster (including two that say it may actually be slower):

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/window ... r-windows/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/0 ... tml?page=3
Interesting. Anyway, see http://www.palemoon.org/faq.shtml#Why_d ... e_in_speed.

The networkworld.com test is not fair because it compares Firefox 12 nightly (with newer code and more optimizations) to Pale Moon 9.
My YouTube channel | Release date of my 13th playlist: August 24, 2020

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#40 Post by Midas »

webfork wrote:Can't find any clear benchmarks suggesting pale moon is actually faster (including two that say it may actually be slower):

http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/window ... r-windows/
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2012/0 ... 55880.html

:| Matt Nawrocki, author of the first quoted article (which, BTW, seems to be based on a comparison of Pale Moon v19 with vanilla Firefox v20) states in a closing comment:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/windows-and-office/review-pale-moon-web-browser-for-windows/#postComments wrote:Benchmark scores can be all over the place and I'm not entirely sure why this is. My test system for this article was a Dual Core i7 laptop with an Intel HD Graphics 4000 core and 4 GB of system memory. Who knows what the underlying issues could be, hence why I wanted to end this review with an up-in-the-air conclusion and let my readers judge for themselves.

I would rather take more authoritative advice...

For a Gecko-based alternative (and one I've been eyeing with some curiosity) have a look at Comodo's IceDragon: viewtopic.php?t=17022.

EDIT: For those inclined towards Linux, I just discovered there's a v24.2.2 build (in 32 and 64 bits tarballs) at the Pale Moon for Linux project (http://sourceforge.net/projects/pm4linux).

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#41 Post by Midas »

This just in...

Pale Moon Browser Ported to Android
http://www.xda-developers.com/android/p ... r-android/[/list]

EDIT: Pale Moon's "End of Windows XP support in Pale Moon" notice is at http://www.palemoon.org/PM_end_of_WinXP_support.shtml.

Some suggested alternatives deserve quoting here, IMHO.
http://www.palemoon.org/PM_end_of_WinXP_support.shtml wrote:
  • Recommended: Since the specialized Atom version will continue to support Windows XP (because of the large amount of netbooks being limited to that operating system) you can switch to that version. [1]
  • Recommended: If you are looking for a full main-line build of Pale Moon with Windows XP support, there are also 32-bit and 64-bit alternative (third-party) builds of the browser specifically maintained for Windows XP and Server 2003 environments. Please do note that these versions will be discontinued when the last retail NT 5.x product goes EoL in July 2015. [2]
  • Of course another alternative is to switch browser. We will be sad to see you go.
  1. http://www.palemoon.org/palemoon-atom.shtml
  2. http://binaryoutcast.com/software/projects/pm4xp/

User avatar
Checker
Posts: 1628
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Ingolstadt [DE]

Re: Pale Moon

#42 Post by Checker »

Changelog says v25.0.1 (2014-10-15) ... but no download link found (presently) :(

User avatar
Checker
Posts: 1628
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Ingolstadt [DE]

Re: Pale Moon

#43 Post by Checker »

Download available ... database entry updated :wink:

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6705
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: Pale Moon

#44 Post by Midas »

This just in:

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 10818
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: Pale Moon

#45 Post by webfork »

Midas wrote:
Ultimately it's Firefox usershare that suffers when users accidentally or through lack of awareness accept an garbage add-on, so that's probably what they're trying to protect. Mozilla's add-on system is their king feature so here's hoping it won't hurt more than it helps.

Post Reply