Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
| reply to SUMware
Re: Chrome BETA Available
I can reproduce the results you got ....anyone can....by cheating. Everyone doing the test correctly sees Fx leaking TPC on the context test. Your cheap attack on my character makes me even more certain that either you don't how to do the tests or you cheated.
If you look at the pages there you'll see they are not finished. That is because Steve Gibson decided to work on the DNS Nameserver Spoofability Test and that is almost finished now so he will be finishing up the cookie forensics tests soon.
--
"The same ferocity that our founders devoted to protect the freedom and independence of the press is now appropriate for our defense of the freedom of the internet. The stakes are the same: the survival of our Republic". Al Gore, The Assault on Reason |
|
SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21
2 edits | reply to Mele20
Re: Chrome BETA Available
said by Mele20  :I can reproduce the results you got ....anyone can....by cheating. Everyone doing the test correctly sees Fx leaking TPC on the context test. Your cheap attack on my character makes me even more certain that either you don't how to do the tests or you cheated. So, you accuse me of cheating? You are absolutely hilariously stunning!!!
What can I say except that you clearly have more pressing personal issues than TPC. |
|
chrisretusn
Retired
Premium
join:2007-08-13
Philippines
| reply to sivran
Re: Chrome Browser (Google) combats IE8's Privacy Tools
said by sivran :I believe part 11.1 to pertain more to such services as YouTube, Docs, Picasa, Pages, Blogger, etc. than to the browser itself. The license applies to "Everything Google" but this clause really doesn't have any bearing on the browser. From the Chrome TOS.
quote:
1.1 Your use of Google’s products, software, services and web sites (referred to collectively as the “Services” in this document and excluding any services provided to you by Google under a separate written agreement)
Chrome is a Google product.
--
Chris
Living in Paradise!! |
|
sivran
Long Live The Suite
Premium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Of course it is. But it is not one to which you submit content.
Or do you mean to agree with those who've implied that Chrome automatically streams everything you upload, be it pictures, your clickstream, your posts on dslreports, or whatever else you do with the browser?
Come on man, Google is much more subtle than that. Otherwise they'd be right up there with ABetterInternet, Gator, Zango, and the like.
--
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon profitable cause... |
|
salzan
Experienced Optimist
Premium
join:2004-01-08
WA State
| reply to NetFixer
Re: Chrome Browser (Google) combats IE8's Privacy Tools
said by NetFixer :I think I may just need to block the Gobble* browser from even accessing my web sites.  * No I did not misspell Google; gobbling up the IP rights of others sounds like what it is intended to do.  That's how I read it too but I don't see how a third party using Chrome to display my website can give Google license to do anything with my content. |
|
chrisretusn
Retired
Premium
join:2007-08-13
Philippines
1 edit | reply to sivran
I am not reading between the lines it is pretty clear with the TOS listed above (Google is revising the TOS by the way) that if I submit pictures using Chrome to a on line photo sharing service I give "Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. (Services being Chrome.)
Edit to add this link
TapTheHive - This Post Not Made In Chrome; Google's EULA Sucks Fixed  |
|
SUMware
Premium
join:2002-05-21
2 edits | reply to Mele20
EULA Updated
New EULA version contains: quote:
11. Content license from you
11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services.
Note: Didn't see any other EULA changes at time of this edit. |
|
NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Murfreesboro, TN
 ·Vonage
 ·Cingular Wireless
·AT&T CallVantage
 ·AT&T Southeast
| reply to salzan
Re: Chrome Browser (Google) combats IE8's Privacy Tools
said by salzan :That's how I read it too but I don't see how a third party using Chrome to display my website can give Google license to do anything with my content. It can't, but it will be easier to block the browser user agent, than to try to recover damages in court. Google may say that its motto is "Don't be evil", but it is Google who defines what is evil.
--
History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
-- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Test your firewall.
Smell the flowers. |
|
swhx7
Premium
join:2006-07-23
Elbonia
·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | reply to Mele20
At many points in the development of the Mozilla/Firefox browsers, there were debates or power struggles pitting the principle of user control against providers of online applications demanding the power to overrule users to make the apps work as intended. For example, website devs wanted the ability to overwrite the status line, manipulate the context menu, suppress the address bar, and similar things, while others said users should be able to prevent such manipulation.
Generally the user-control principle won. But the philosophical conflict goes on. And I think what we have here in Chrome is a browser specially adapted to one company's web-based applications. It's easier for Google to build its own browser than to try to influence the direction of browsers that don't allow them as much control as they'd like.
The danger is that useful web applications will start to depend on specialized clients, leading to the web being re-fragmented into proprietary ghettos. I'd rather see a web with more standards compliance, total control on the client side, and web services adapting to these conditions rather than vice-versa.
Edit:
After posting the above I came to this Register editorial making similar points in more depth. »www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/04···nalysis/
Also this Cnet article clarifies about what Chrome sends to Google. »news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10031661-56.html |
|
salzan
Experienced Optimist
Premium
join:2004-01-08
WA State
| But with clauses like this:
12.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the Services. You don't know what Chrome will send to Google tomorrow. |
|
Kiziller
@rr.com | reply to Mele20
Here is an excellent update in a new thread for those of us who are still using Chrome !!!!
»Google's Chrome Browser - Security & Privacy Issues |
|
