Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-29 Thread Lisi Reisz
On Sunday 29 December 2013 00:38:30 Weaver wrote:
 On Sat, December 28, 2013 3:49 pm, Lisi Reisz wrote:
  On Saturday 28 December 2013 11:56:37 Chris Bannister wrote:
  On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
   And storing banking information outside someone's head is
   wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to start
   ;)
 
  If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a
  damn good reason, and that is just as a start! :)
 
  It is perfectly possible to lose all or part of one's memory
  without an accident.  All it requires is old age and the wrong
  genes.  It is fatal to keep no record anywhere other than in
  one's memory.

 To be honest, I really can't remember that ever happening.
 Cheers!

Can't remember what happening?  People losing memory in old age?  Do 
you indulge in euthanasia of anyone elderly you come across?? ;-)

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201312291222.57141.lisi.re...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-29 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sun, 2013-12-29 at 12:22 +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
 On Sunday 29 December 2013 00:38:30 Weaver wrote:
  On Sat, December 28, 2013 3:49 pm, Lisi Reisz wrote:
   On Saturday 28 December 2013 11:56:37 Chris Bannister wrote:
   On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
And storing banking information outside someone's head is
wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to start
;)
  
   If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a
   damn good reason, and that is just as a start! :)
  
   It is perfectly possible to lose all or part of one's memory
   without an accident.  All it requires is old age and the wrong
   genes.  It is fatal to keep no record anywhere other than in
   one's memory.
 
  To be honest, I really can't remember that ever happening.
  Cheers!
 
 Can't remember what happening?  People losing memory in old age?  Do 
 you indulge in euthanasia of anyone elderly you come across?? ;-)

No he doesn't, he simply has forgotten, that he has forgotten something.
A lame joke, or as we say in German, The joke has got a beard.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1388320453.1062.113.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-29 Thread Chris Bannister
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 12:22:57PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
 On Sunday 29 December 2013 00:38:30 Weaver wrote:
  On Sat, December 28, 2013 3:49 pm, Lisi Reisz wrote:
[..]
   It is perfectly possible to lose all or part of one's memory
   without an accident.  All it requires is old age and the wrong
   genes.  It is fatal to keep no record anywhere other than in
   one's memory.
 
  To be honest, I really can't remember that ever happening.
  Cheers!
 
 Can't remember what happening?  People losing memory in old age?  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3m0KYbCsPY

-- 
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing. --- Malcolm X


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131229211418.GA565@tal



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On 12/25/13, Reco recovery...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:51:25 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 15:40 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 18:04 +0400, Reco wrote:
   I wrote one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles

To friends stuck in proprietary land, I have suggested here and there
that they do their internet banking in a separate firefox profile from
their youtube and facebook etc.

On the rare occasion they have later swapped to GNU, one individual of
course wanted to keep using her various (she uses quite a few)
profiles, all of which she keeps in separate Truecrypt volumes!

 Tell me, which one is more KISS:

 1) Appending certain 'keywords' to a link.
 2) Parsing such link.
 3) Relying on a custom script.

 Or, just:

 Run the link in a browser for the current user account.

When one user is running multiple identities be in Unix-account
logins, Firefox profiles, or something else yet, this is always going
to be more complicated to the one-identity-only problem.

I agree that separate Linux accounts appears to have some definitely
favourable options. But is the setting up of separate _user_ accounts,
for only one user, and training that user (lets say grandma), for
the sake of some extra security, an established and easy pathway?

Rhetorical question I know. And yes, of course, training Grandma to
use multiple Firefox profiles is probably not going to be much easier.
And in both cases banking icon on desktop vs family and photos
icon on desktop is going to be the same, from grandma's perspective,
no matter what's under the hood.

I think what we need is some more software/memes/workflows to be
established for the easy (eg gui) management of multiple identities
(or security contexts or ...)

XFCE still doesn't have a sanctioned XFCE user management applet,
and those from other DE's are not designed with automate restrictions
for banking-only firefox profile type user-account creation idea.

Maybe an opportunity for libre-software desktop promoter-developers...

  The main thing is
 
  - KISS
  - a user has got no root privileges or assumed the user s admin too,
than it's simply nonsense to become root and too add another user.
 
  Sometimes it's useful to add another user and sometimes it's not.

 Hardly an issue, as adding a user is done once per OS lifetime, not
 each time browser starts.

Again, user accounts, and firefox profiles, are particular technologies.

We probably ought think in terms of identities and how best to
facilitate the use-cases for the types of identities that we (or our
Debian users) will want to manage. The particular tech under the hood
ought be secondary.

...
 - You have one user with browser profile with flash plugin enabled. Any
 damage that's done via flash plugin is limited to this account data.

 - You have a different user with browser profile with java plugin
 enabled. Again, any damage that's done via java plugin is limited to
 this account data.

 - You have a third user for Google Chrome, which has an interesting
 habit to read files in user's $HOME for unknown reasons.

 - And, you have the main account, which is allowed to run browsers with
 rights of three previous users, and stripped down (no plugins, disabled
 cookies and JS) browser for that clicked link.

 It's basic damage control, applied in advance.

This is a good type of thinking of course. Depending on the type of
online identity, an extra Firefox profile might be plenty, and in some
cases perhaps preferred.

Of course, for my internet banking, paypal and bill payments
identity, the stricter protection provided between Linux user accounts
appears on the surface to make a lot of sense.

Separation of ebay and amazon etc product browsing, vs using PayPal to
actually make a specific payment, and how to separate these two
browser functions into separate personal identity security contexts
is a more complex issue I think...

 Sometimes it's even more useful if a family does share one account with
 different settings. It belongs to the things they want to share or not
 want to share.

True. People do this.

 That's wrong thing. Would somebody think of the children ;)!
 Having a different account for each family member saves one from 'who
 deleted my important file' incidents, which is invaluable.

True. This happens.

 At least in my family everyone has a different account on every host I
 have in my house. And people usually know (and children can be
 more-or-less easily taught) about usernames/passwords. It's the 'browser
 profiles' which are complete life-changing discovery for them.

Every tech has its place. Goals (as you pointed out some above) are
the real question, and many of those questions are not yet well
answered, it seems self evident.

Best regards to all,
Zenaan


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact 

Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Sat, 28 Dec 2013 21:01:31 +1100
Zenaan Harkness z...@freedbms.net wrote:

 On 12/25/13, Reco recovery...@gmail.com wrote:
  On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:51:25 +0100
  Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 15:40 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
   On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 18:04 +0400, Reco wrote:
I wrote one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles
 
 To friends stuck in proprietary land, I have suggested here and there
 that they do their internet banking in a separate firefox profile from
 their youtube and facebook etc.
 
 On the rare occasion they have later swapped to GNU, one individual of
 course wanted to keep using her various (she uses quite a few)
 profiles, all of which she keeps in separate Truecrypt volumes!

An interesting approach, but not something I would practice myself.
See, using Truecrypt (or LUKS, or whatever) implies that whatever is
stored inside is valuable enough to keep it encrypted. Anything that is
put into a crypto container is safe until one begins to use it.
And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)


  Tell me, which one is more KISS:
 
  1) Appending certain 'keywords' to a link.
  2) Parsing such link.
  3) Relying on a custom script.
 
  Or, just:
 
  Run the link in a browser for the current user account.
 
 When one user is running multiple identities be in Unix-account
 logins, Firefox profiles, or something else yet, this is always going
 to be more complicated to the one-identity-only problem.
 
 I agree that separate Linux accounts appears to have some definitely
 favourable options. But is the setting up of separate _user_ accounts,
 for only one user, and training that user (lets say grandma), for
 the sake of some extra security, an established and easy pathway?

I believe you're confusing 'hard to setup' with 'hard to use'. Of
course the end user would be given appropriate icons (or menu entries,
or whatever) which will say 'Press me for Youtube and Netflix', 'Press
me for bankning only'.

See Android. They are using different uids for different applications
from the beginning, and nobody complains that 'Android is teh hard'.

 
 Rhetorical question I know. And yes, of course, training Grandma to
 use multiple Firefox profiles is probably not going to be much easier.
 And in both cases banking icon on desktop vs family and photos
 icon on desktop is going to be the same, from grandma's perspective,
 no matter what's under the hood.
 
 I think what we need is some more software/memes/workflows to be
 established for the easy (eg gui) management of multiple identities
 (or security contexts or ...)

That would require all browser makers to change IMO. So far their
attitude was 'put all your activities into one big browser window'.


 XFCE still doesn't have a sanctioned XFCE user management applet,
 and those from other DE's are not designed with automate restrictions
 for banking-only firefox profile type user-account creation idea.
 
 Maybe an opportunity for libre-software desktop promoter-developers...

That's the point of another different discussion, but my opinion on
that is - useradd, userdel and passwd work good enough.
On that unlikely occasion I'll need pointy and clicky GUI for user
management task - I'll use usermode package (which is already here, and
uses GTK2).


Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131228144311.d3affcd938d6ca5faa5b3...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Chris Bannister
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
 And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
 many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)

If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a damn
good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

-- 
If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people
who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the 
oppressing. --- Malcolm X


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20131228115637.GA26712@tal



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Zenaan Harkness
On 12/28/13, Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
 And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
 many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)

 If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a damn
 good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

I've thought for some years that a small inexpensive palm-size
computer, with a truecrypt/tcplay volume, which contains a text file
containing passwords.

Text files are git-syncable (to backup crypt volumes (when mounted of
course)) and this palm device could be unlocked with user-chosen
combination of security options - a USB key or smartcard, pass phrase,
voice, fingerprint etc. I know, a smart-phone :)

But, the point being, a dedicated never-connected to any network
device (ie no phone part, no wireless etc).

And what gets unlocked (very temporarily) is just a text file -
perhaps with a fancy Android-swipey GUI thing to scroll through or
something.

Sorry getting more OT I guess. I'll just, carry on ...


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAOsGNSQ4hatos8ED1kmd+0W0rPAmUf7w5m5Sm=vvg_w-x3o...@mail.gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Reco
On Sun, 29 Dec 2013 00:56:37 +1300
Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:

 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
  And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
  many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)
 
 If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a damn
 good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

Um, but would not such accident will result in losing information of
existence of bank account also? And I can always go to my bank in
person, provide them my ID, and have my cash anyway.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131228162510.80daacaf3573ea2e5b3ec...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sun, 2013-12-29 at 00:56 +1300, Chris Bannister wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
  And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
  many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)
 
 If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a damn
 good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

A 4 numbered PIN of a bank card that is seldom used already can be a
PITA without being victim of an accident. The PINs change every few
years and after a while there are similar PINs in your memory, something
like 9972 vs 7929.

A written down aide-memoire in an address book on an USB stick or
similar might help.

Mona Lisa Tux
79 Iceshelf City
Icedove Street 29


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1388244198.1062.20.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Sat, 2013-12-28 at 23:13 +1100, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
 On 12/28/13, Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote:
  On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
  And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong on so
  many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)
 
  If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a damn
  good reason, and that is just as a start! :)
 
 I've thought for some years that a small inexpensive palm-size
 computer, with a truecrypt/tcplay volume, which contains a text file
 containing passwords.

And how do you remember the passphrase for the encryption after the roof
tile has fallen on your head?

Even my idea with the not encrypted address book, a written down
aide-memoire in an address book on an USB stick or similar might help,
has it's drawback. The user likely will forget to unplug the USB stick
or unplugs the USB stick, get sidetracked by a telephone call and
instead of putting down the stick on the PC tower, the user put down the
stick on the telephone table and won't remember it.

You are aware that users reply to phishing mails, seemingly not the
users who had a nasty accident and need to store the data by a browser
profile ;).

You can not expect the same habits by all users. A paperhanger, hanging
wallpapers 5 days a week, for 8 hours a day, does internalise
procedures, movements. A paperhanger can't expect that you follow
procedures, movements the same way as he does, if you hang papers every
few years. You can't expect that a user acts as a power-user does,
especially not when having a brain damage, being old etc..


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1388245864.1062.42.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Lisi Reisz
On Saturday 28 December 2013 11:56:37 Chris Bannister wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
  And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong
  on so many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)

 If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a
 damn good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

It is perfectly possible to lose all or part of one's memory without 
an accident.  All it requires is old age and the wrong genes.  It is 
fatal to keep no record anywhere other than in one's memory.

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201312282349.22052.lisi.re...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-28 Thread Weaver

On Sat, December 28, 2013 3:49 pm, Lisi Reisz wrote:
 On Saturday 28 December 2013 11:56:37 Chris Bannister wrote:
 On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 02:43:11PM +0400, Reco wrote:
  And storing banking information outside someone's head is wrong
  on so many levels that I don't even know where to start ;)

 If you have a nasty accident and lose parts of your memory is a
 damn good reason, and that is just as a start! :)

 It is perfectly possible to lose all or part of one's memory without
 an accident.  All it requires is old age and the wrong genes.  It is
 fatal to keep no record anywhere other than in one's memory.

To be honest, I really can't remember that ever happening.
Cheers!

Weaver

-- 
It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its  government.
 -- Thomas Paine

Registered Linux User: 554515



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/f5636b2b0ca24c59852dc93a473ef5d5.squir...@fruiteater.riseup.net



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-27 Thread Scott Ferguson
On 25/12/13 14:08, Joel Rees wrote:
 On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Reco recovery...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi.

 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:29:28 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
 Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick,

 No, if you do it smart way, such as (in .xsessionrc):

 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user1 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user2 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority

 And configure sudo to keep $DISPLAY.
 [...]
 
 I'm using xhost to do something similar, maybe the same thing? I
 described it a couple of years ago:
 
 http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/08/simple-sandbox-for-firefox.html
 
 I'd be interested in comments.
 

Why not use sux instead?

from man sux:-
sux is a wrapper around the standard su command which will transfer
your X credentials to the target user.

Note, suxterm forces ARGS to be 'xterm', and will try to launch an
xterminal window.


Kind regards.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52be74fe.1000...@gmail.com



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-25 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 08:33:12 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 08:28 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 11:05 +0400, Reco wrote:
   And that assumes you're keeping browsing history. Why people are doin'
   this is something that I can never understand.
  
  Ok, in this case I recommend to use
  
  [rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Q tor-browser-en
  tor-browser-en 3.5-1

Wow. You don't take half-measures, do you?
I was referring to a simple 'Clear history when Firefox closes'
checkbox.


  For my Debian and *buntu install I don't have it installed, since I
  seldom/never need it, it's only installed for my Arch Linux, just in
  case I should need it.

TOR has its' uses for me, but installing the thing just to clear
browser history is an overkill.


  IOW a history is useful, is useful, is useful :).
  
  About what are we talking?
  
  The easiest way still is to use profiles.

Easy != secure.
Convenient != secure.


 Ok, security is something
  else. At least suppress trackers and if needed use a TOR browser tuned
  regarding to security, like normal anonymous Firefox browsing the TOR
   ^^ sorry, I already was
 thinking about an add-on, but there is the private window option,
 which is a Firfox default option.
  Firefox browsing doesn't provide a history.

'Private window' is useless for me.
I mean - 'not keeping browser history'? I don't keep it anyway.
'Not keeping cookies'? All cookies are purged on browser close.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131225120111.142c711251eb69e16d6ac...@gmail.com



Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 08:08 +, Bonno Bloksma wrote:
 Different browser profiles is like the way Outlook (Express) on
 Windows have/had different profiles. That is a leftover from the old
 times like Windows 3, 9x, etc when there was no possibility to have
 different logins. Unix style computers have been multi user from the
 beginning, so not using that possibility to differentiate between
 users and then working around that limitation seems weird.

I want to have different profiles on Linux machines to have different
settings, different histories without changing the user.

Regards,
Ralf




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387886123.5471.41.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:55:23 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 I want to have different profiles on Linux machines to have different
 settings, different histories without changing the user.

A classic example of a 'XY problem', Ralf.

What problem are you trying to solve with this approach?

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131224160515.1a7721e645c97fd6062f4...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 16:05 +0400, Reco wrote:
  Hi.
 
 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 12:55:23 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  I want to have different profiles on Linux machines to have different
  settings, different histories without changing the user.
 
 A classic example of a 'XY problem', Ralf.
 
 What problem are you trying to solve with this approach?

If I start Firefox with profile A, I might have cookies enabled by
default and the history only includes Linux links.

When using Firefox profile B, I perhaps have cookies disabled by default
and the history only includes links to audio gear.

So if I search the history for radio, I would get software related to
radio by profile A and service manuals, semiconductor vendors by profile
B, after doing research, bevor it was useful to decide what I should
bookmark.

And again, e.g. different security settings, one profile without
add-ons, the other profile perhaps with 20 add-on.

Regards,
Ralf



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387887206.5471.49.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:13:26 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 If I start Firefox with profile A, I might have cookies enabled by
 default and the history only includes Linux links.
 
 When using Firefox profile B, I perhaps have cookies disabled by default
 and the history only includes links to audio gear.
 
 So if I search the history for radio, I would get software related to
 radio by profile A and service manuals, semiconductor vendors by profile
 B, after doing research, bevor it was useful to decide what I should
 bookmark.
 
 And again, e.g. different security settings, one profile without
 add-ons, the other profile perhaps with 20 add-on.

Ok. And how exactly using different users for these profiles limits you?

What's so hard in running 'sudo -u user1 firefox' and 'sudo -u user2
firefox'?

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131224161725.d3b0a544e78004da7...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 16:17 +0400, Reco wrote:
 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:13:26 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  If I start Firefox with profile A, I might have cookies enabled by
  default and the history only includes Linux links.
  
  When using Firefox profile B, I perhaps have cookies disabled by default
  and the history only includes links to audio gear.
  
  So if I search the history for radio, I would get software related to
  radio by profile A and service manuals, semiconductor vendors by profile
  B, after doing research, bevor it was useful to decide what I should
  bookmark.
  
  And again, e.g. different security settings, one profile without
  add-ons, the other profile perhaps with 20 add-on.
 
 Ok. And how exactly using different users for these profiles limits you?
 
 What's so hard in running 'sudo -u user1 firefox' and 'sudo -u user2
 firefox'?

This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick, but simply using a
profile, Firefox options -P profile   Start with profile, you
don't need to add another user, you don't need to type a password.

Regards,
Ralf



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387888168.5471.52.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:29:28 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
 Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick, 

No, if you do it smart way, such as (in .xsessionrc):

xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user1 -- sh -c \
cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user2 -- sh -c \
cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority

And configure sudo to keep $DISPLAY.


 but simply using a
 profile, Firefox options -P profile   Start with profile, you
 don't need to add another user, you don't need to type a password.

Sudo can be configured for passwordless access, but that's not the
point.

Say, one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles under the
same OS user. One also runs, say, MUA such as Evolution and clicks a
link in this MUA. Now, the question is - which instance of firefox will
open the link? From my experience the result is unpredictable.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131224164223.e775053aea741d36d0956...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 16:42 +0400, Reco wrote:
  Hi.
 
 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:29:28 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
  Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick, 
 
 No, if you do it smart way, such as (in .xsessionrc):
 
 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user1 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user2 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
 
 And configure sudo to keep $DISPLAY.

20 profiles = 20 users and you will do all those settings instead of
running a browser profile? This isn't the KISS principle and I prefer it
the KISS way. It's not smart to make something complicated, when there
is an easy solution. A lot of Linux software for good reasons provides
profiles.

 
  but simply using a
  profile, Firefox options -P profile   Start with profile, you
  don't need to add another user, you don't need to type a password.
 
 Sudo can be configured for passwordless access, but that's not the
 point.
 
 Say, one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles under the
 same OS user. One also runs, say, MUA such as Evolution and clicks a
 link in this MUA. Now, the question is - which instance of firefox will
 open the link? From my experience the result is unpredictable.

The default browser could start with a profile too and take a look at my
script, you even could check the link for keywords. But again, I prefer
the KISS way.

The default browser for some users anyway is an issue, e.g. they don't
want that browser X is opened, when browser Y is running, that's why I
wrote a script to help some of them, I don't need it myself:

$ cat debro 
#!/bin/dash

# Name:Debro
# Description: Use default or opened web browser
# Comment: Launch default web browser or use already opened web browser
# Command: /usr/local/bin/debro %u

# Default browser
default_b=qupzilla

# Alternative browsers in order of usage
browser_1=firefox
browser_2=opera
browser_3=rekonq
last_brow=google-chrome-stable

# Browser for tube websites with flash content
tube_brow=google-chrome-stable

if [ $(id -u) = 0 ]; then
  echo It is not allowed to run Debro with root privileges; exit 1
fi

echo $* | grep tube  /dev/null
case $? in 0) test -f /usr/bin/$tube_brow  exec $tube_brow $*;; esac

pidof $default_b  /dev/null
case $? in 0) exec $default_b $*;; esac

pidof $browser_1  /dev/null
case $? in 0) exec $browser_1 $*;; esac

pidof $browser_2  /dev/null
case $? in 0) exec $browser_2 $*;; esac

pidof $browser_3  /dev/null
case $? in 0) exec $browser_3 $*;; esac

pidof $last_brow  /dev/null
case $? in
  0) exec $last_brow $*;;
  *) test -f /usr/bin/$default_b  exec $default_b $*;;
esac

echo No /usr/bin/$default_b available
exit 1

Regards,
Ralf


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387892134.5471.60.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 14:35 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 Sudo can be configured for passwordless access, but that's not the
 point.

That is a point, you want users to tinker with root privileges, when
there is a better, a KISS solution that is idiotproof.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387892430.5471.62.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
Oops, Reco wrote, not I ;).

 On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 14:35 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  Sudo can be configured for passwordless access, but that's not the
  point.
 
 That is a point, you want users to tinker with root privileges, when
 there is a better, a KISS solution that is idiotproof.

Happy holidays,
Ralf



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387892694.5471.64.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf

  Sudo can be configured for passwordless access, but that's not the
  point.
 
 That is a point, you want users to tinker with root privileges, when
 there is a better, a KISS solution that is idiotproof.

Sorry, with privileges, not root privileges. Anyway completely unneeded,
and anti-KISS.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387892945.5471.66.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
A last note, before I go off-line for holidays.

A user is allowed to add a profile, but a user needs to ask the admin to
add a new user ;).


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387893275.5471.68.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 14:54:35 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 A last note, before I go off-line for holidays.
 
 A user is allowed to add a profile, but a user needs to ask the admin to
 add a new user ;).

Ok, I've read all your contribution to the thread. Let us start with
something simple.

You're writing, that there's this script that checks which browser is
to run actually. Nice thing, but note that I wrote one runs two
instances of firefox with different profiles.
How exactly this script should help the user to distinguish one firefox
from another firefox?

 20 profiles = 20 users and you will do all those settings instead of
 running a browser profile? This isn't the KISS principle and I prefer it
 the KISS way.

And note, it is 20 users who are unable to overwrite each other's
files. Or read each other's files. KISS principle is no substitute for
a basic security.

 A user is allowed to add a profile, but a user needs
 to ask the admin to add a new user ;).

Fail to see how exactly it complicates things if user and admin is the
same person.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131224180450.69fea9eecd822ede71ca0...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 18:04 +0400, Reco wrote:
 I wrote one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles

and I replied that you can start your default browser with a profile
too. The issue you pointed out is the same for the profile approach and
another user account approach. If you want to open the link by the
browser that is intended for a special history, you need to check the
link for keywords, it doesn't matter what approach you use. The script
simply checks for one keyword to open a browser that is able to play
flash thingies. You can do this with many keywords and then chose a
browser by profile or by another account that should be opened.

The main thing is

- KISS
- a user has got no root privileges or assumed the user s admin too,
  than it's simply nonsense to become root and too add another user.

Sometimes it's useful to add another user and sometimes it's not. I
marked it as OT, because having another account for another family
member is useful, but having other accounts for profiles, for different
work-flows is completely wrong.

I'm in in passing and English isn't my native language, so that you
missed the point of what I try to explain might be my bad.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387896030.8138.9.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 15:40 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 18:04 +0400, Reco wrote:
  I wrote one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles
 
 and I replied that you can start your default browser with a profile
 too. The issue you pointed out is the same for the profile approach and
 another user account approach. If you want to open the link by the
 browser that is intended for a special history, you need to check the
 link for keywords, it doesn't matter what approach you use. The script
 simply checks for one keyword to open a browser that is able to play
 flash thingies. You can do this with many keywords and then chose a
 browser by profile or by another account that should be opened.
 
 The main thing is
 
 - KISS
 - a user has got no root privileges or assumed the user s admin too,
   than it's simply nonsense to become root and too add another user.
 
 Sometimes it's useful to add another user and sometimes it's not. I
 marked it as OT, because having another account for another family
 member is useful, but having other accounts for profiles, for different
 work-flows is completely wrong.
 
 I'm in in passing and English isn't my native language, so that you
 missed the point of what I try to explain might be my bad.

PS:

Sometimes it's even more useful if a family does share one account with
different settings. It belongs to the things they want to share or not
want to share.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387896685.8138.13.camel@archlinux



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 15:51:25 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 15:40 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
  On Tue, 2013-12-24 at 18:04 +0400, Reco wrote:
   I wrote one runs two instances of firefox with different profiles
  
  and I replied that you can start your default browser with a profile
  too. The issue you pointed out is the same for the profile approach and
  another user account approach. If you want to open the link by the
  browser that is intended for a special history, you need to check the
  link for keywords, it doesn't matter what approach you use. The script
  simply checks for one keyword to open a browser that is able to play
  flash thingies. You can do this with many keywords and then chose a
  browser by profile or by another account that should be opened.

Tell me, which one is more KISS:

1) Appending certain 'keywords' to a link.
2) Parsing such link.
3) Relying on a custom script.

Or, just:

Run the link in a browser for the current user account.


  The main thing is
  
  - KISS
  - a user has got no root privileges or assumed the user s admin too,
than it's simply nonsense to become root and too add another user.
  
  Sometimes it's useful to add another user and sometimes it's not.

Hardly an issue, as adding a user is done once per OS lifetime, not
each time browser starts.


  I
  marked it as OT, because having another account for another family
  member is useful, but having other accounts for profiles, for different
  work-flows is completely wrong.

No, it's completely right thing to do. Let me explain:

- You have one user with browser profile with flash plugin enabled. Any
damage that's done via flash plugin is limited to this account data.
- You have a different user with browser profile with java plugin
enabled. Again, any damage that's done via java plugin is limited to
this account data.
- You have a third user for Google Chrome, which has an interesting
habit to read files in user's $HOME for unknown reasons.
- And, you have the main account, which is allowed to run browsers with
rights of three previous users, and stripped down (no plugins, disabled
cookies and JS) browser for that clicked link.

It's basic damage control, applied in advance.


  
  I'm in in passing and English isn't my native language, so that you
  missed the point of what I try to explain might be my bad.

I never pretended that I'm a native English speaker. I can understand
you good enough.


 Sometimes it's even more useful if a family does share one account with
 different settings. It belongs to the things they want to share or not
 want to share.

That's wrong thing. Would somebody think of the children ;)!
Having a different account for each family member saves one from 'who
deleted my important file' incidents, which is invaluable.

At least in my family everyone has a different account on every host I
have in my house. And people usually know (and children can be
more-or-less easily taught) about usernames/passwords. It's the 'browser
profiles' which are complete life-changing discovery for them.

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131224192614.0d66ca7ce95d27e16b578...@gmail.com



Re: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.

2013-12-24 Thread Joel Rees
On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Reco recovery...@gmail.com wrote:
  Hi.

 On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:29:28 +0100
 Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
 Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick,

 No, if you do it smart way, such as (in .xsessionrc):

 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user1 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
 xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user2 -- sh -c \
 cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority

 And configure sudo to keep $DISPLAY.
 [...]

I'm using xhost to do something similar, maybe the same thing? I
described it a couple of years ago:

http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/08/simple-sandbox-for-firefox.html

I'd be interested in comments.

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/caar43iohtijp_3vjwp+xupxp+ybt1gdl+18v9u4wrjrbtfq...@mail.gmail.com



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 12:08:01 +0900
Joel Rees joel.r...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 9:42 PM, Reco recovery...@gmail.com wrote:
   Hi.
 
  On Tue, 24 Dec 2013 13:29:28 +0100
  Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:
 
  This would lead to Error: cannot open display: :0.0.
  Sure, $ xhost +; sudo -u [...] does the trick,
 
  No, if you do it smart way, such as (in .xsessionrc):
 
  xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user1 -- sh -c \
  cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
  xauth extract - $DISPLAY | sudo -u user2 -- sh -c \
  cat - /home/user1/.Xauthority
 
  And configure sudo to keep $DISPLAY.
  [...]
 
 I'm using xhost to do something similar, maybe the same thing? I
 described it a couple of years ago:
 
 http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/08/simple-sandbox-for-firefox.html
 
 I'd be interested in comments.


Result is definitely the same, although I'd use

xhost +si:localuser:${1}

instead of

xhost local:${1}

Not there is much difference about it, given that Debian (or Fedora, or
any major distribution for that matter) does not ship XSECURITY
extension for a long time.


And I'd use

sudo -H -u ${1} /usr/bin/firefox $2

instead of

sudo -H -u ${1} firefox $2

because:

a) Without -H sudo can keep $HOME, which will force firefox to search
it's profile in the different user's home (kinda beats the purpose of
sandbox, isn't it?).

b) That sneaky sandbox user can override firefox with something
like /home/user9-boxed/bin/firefox, which is bad.


What I'm curious about, is that you did not have to permit sudo to keep
$DISPLAY environment variable. Is it something that Fedora allows by
default? Because Debian surely does not (env_reset by default).

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131225101505.a913d65d212d52505052d...@gmail.com



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 10:15 +0400, Reco wrote:
 b) That sneaky sandbox user can override firefox with something
 like /home/user9-boxed/bin/firefox, which is bad.

Here we are again ;).

Using a profile, supported by firefox, is the easiest and securest way.

I only use another user, instead of a profile, if I need a password,
e.g. to make a history including adult content unavailable for kids.

If you care for security, this is one reason to prefer profiles.

Btw. somebody on this list once called it a sledgehammer and I agree,
but if I don't use a profile, but another user then I don't care:

xhost +
gksudo -u chuser $*
xhost -
exit

I still don't understand what's bad with using profiles. A profile
doesn't have any drawback.

:D
Ralf



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387953233.8138.86.camel@archlinux



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-24 Thread Reco
 Hi.

On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 07:33:53 +0100
Ralf Mardorf ralf.mard...@alice-dsl.net wrote:

 On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 10:15 +0400, Reco wrote:
  b) That sneaky sandbox user can override firefox with something
  like /home/user9-boxed/bin/firefox, which is bad.
 
 Here we are again ;).
 
 Using a profile, supported by firefox, is the easiest and securest way.

An ability to read and write an arbitrary file in user's $HOME cannot be
called 'secure'.

And even if I'd trust browser (firefox is a free software, after all),
there is a matter of plugins.

 
 I only use another user, instead of a profile, if I need a password,
 e.g. to make a history including adult content unavailable for kids.

And that assumes you're keeping browsing history. Why people are doin'
this is something that I can never understand.

Still, even if we disregard this 'browsing history' topic, there is a
matter of online advertisement, which is known to show banners based on
a user habits. And IMO not all children should see all these
banners.

 
 If you care for security, this is one reason to prefer profiles.

If I'd care for security that much, I'd use LXC for running a browser.
Since I'm lazy, I just use a couple of accounts.


 
 Btw. somebody on this list once called it a sledgehammer and I agree,
 but if I don't use a profile, but another user then I don't care:
 
 xhost +
 gksudo -u chuser $*
 xhost -
 exit
 
 I still don't understand what's bad with using profiles. A profile
 doesn't have any drawback.

See above.


Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/20131225110526.16137e81dbcdca35fcd68...@gmail.com



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 11:05 +0400, Reco wrote:
 And that assumes you're keeping browsing history. Why people are doin'
 this is something that I can never understand.

Ok, in this case I recommend to use

[rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Q tor-browser-en
tor-browser-en 3.5-1

For my Debian and *buntu install I don't have it installed, since I
seldom/never need it, it's only installed for my Arch Linux, just in
case I should need it.

IOW a history is useful, is useful, is useful :).

About what are we talking?

The easiest way still is to use profiles. Ok, security is something
else. At least suppress trackers and if needed use a TOR browser tuned
regarding to security, like normal anonymous Firefox browsing the TOR
Firefox browsing doesn't provide a history.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387956491.8138.95.camel@archlinux



Re: sudo and firefox (was: Off-topic: Gmail Grrrr.)

2013-12-24 Thread Ralf Mardorf
On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 08:28 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
 On Wed, 2013-12-25 at 11:05 +0400, Reco wrote:
  And that assumes you're keeping browsing history. Why people are doin'
  this is something that I can never understand.
 
 Ok, in this case I recommend to use
 
 [rocketmouse@archlinux ~]$ pacman -Q tor-browser-en
 tor-browser-en 3.5-1
 
 For my Debian and *buntu install I don't have it installed, since I
 seldom/never need it, it's only installed for my Arch Linux, just in
 case I should need it.
 
 IOW a history is useful, is useful, is useful :).
 
 About what are we talking?
 
 The easiest way still is to use profiles. Ok, security is something
 else. At least suppress trackers and if needed use a TOR browser tuned
 regarding to security, like normal anonymous Firefox browsing the TOR
  ^^ sorry, I already was
thinking about an add-on, but there is the private window option,
which is a Firfox default option.
 Firefox browsing doesn't provide a history.
 
 



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1387956792.8138.98.camel@archlinux