New Update Osprey Browser Protection discussion and updates

Add-on/Extension Page
https://github.com/Foulest/Osprey
https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/osprey-browser-protection/jmnpibhfpmpfjhhkmpadlbgjnbhpjgnd
https://microsoftedge.microsoft.com/addons/detail/osprey-browser-protectio/nopglhplnghfhpniofkcopmhbjdonlgn
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/osprey-browser-protection/
Foulest said:
I would just disable Malwarebytes Browser Guard. I have absolutely no idea why your icon is black and white.
Click to expand...
yes thanks! I had disabled MbamBG before I saw your post, and Osprey blocked a bad URL :D (w/trafficlight) & I took out my magnifying glass and icon still looks black & white to me, but no bigee. Nice app!
 
  • Applause
  • HaHa
Reactions: Sorrento and piquiteco
simmerskool said:
so far I left the protection ON its 8 default settings. MbamBG was already running so that adds to the "load" but the slowdown (if any?) I thought I saw was just a fraction and certainly not an annoyance.
Click to expand...
What slows down browsing is Bitdefender's TrafficLight extension and when I used BD it was the same. Malwarebytes Browser Guard also slows down browsing and the Osprey Browser Protection extension has no impact on browsing. Although Malwarebytes Browser Guard is a good extension I think that now with Osprey Browser Protection with 14 engine I think there is no need to use MBG (Malwarebytes Browser Guard), if you don't want to delete the Malwarebytes Browser Guard extension then disable it in your browser extensions and leave only Osprey, I can't say much because I was like you, I'll be honest I was using MBG, Emsisoft Browser Security, TrafficLight and Netcraft did you see what an exaggeration on my part? Now with the arrival of Osprey Browser Protection I don't need them anymore. But I think I know what you're worried about. Just to refresh your memory, take a look at the test screenshots on the eicar website. Osprey Browser Protection also blocks urls with executables, how cool is that? You can test it yourself and draw your own conclusions. ;)
1745458577030.png

1745458605494.png

1745458630290.png
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: Parkinsond, simmerskool, Jan Willy and 3 others
Osprey Browser Protection 1.1.6 (already available for Chrome and Firefox).

Changes in 1.1.6​

  • Added system/enterprise policy integration
  • Added option to hide the report button
  • Added option to lock protection options
  • Added option to set cache expiration time
  • Moved option to hide continue button to policies
  • Fixed context menus in Firefox
  • Bug fixes and improvements
This update has been submitted to all extension stores.
Click to expand...
github.com

Release 1.1.6 · Foulest/Osprey

Changes in 1.1.6 Added system/enterprise policy integration Added option to hide the report button Added option to lock protection options Added option to set cache expiration time Moved option to...
github.com github.com
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
  • Applause
Reactions: SeriousHoax, brambedkar59, piquiteco and 10 others
Analyze for version 1.1.6 from addons.mozilla.org:
Overall Safety Conclusion:

Based on the provided code:

  1. The extension functions as described: checking URLs against selected security providers based on user settings.
  2. It actively minimizes the data sent (stripping parameters, using hashes/hostnames where possible) according to provider API limitations.
  3. Data is sent only to the servers of the listed, known security providers.
  4. There is no evidence of telemetry, collection of sensitive personal data, or transmission of data to undeclared third parties.
  5. The code is not obfuscated and follows reasonable security practices for a browser extension of this type.
  6. The broad *://*/* host permission is necessary for webNavigation to work on all sites but doesn't appear to be abused for data exfiltration.
The extension appears to be safe and respects user privacy within the constraints of its core function (checking URLs with external services).
Click to expand...

I hope the developer is not offended by the additional security audit :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeriousHoax, piquiteco, Foulest and 5 others
piquiteco said:
What slows down browsing is Bitdefender's TrafficLight extension and when I used BD it was the same. Malwarebytes Browser Guard also slows down browsing and the Osprey Browser Protection extension has no impact on browsing. Although Malwarebytes Browser Guard is a good extension I think that now with Osprey Browser Protection with 14 engine I think there is no need to use MBG (Malwarebytes Browser Guard), if you don't want to delete the Malwarebytes Browser Guard extension then disable it in your browser extensions and leave only Osprey, I can't say much because I was like you, I'll be honest I was using MBG, Emsisoft Browser Security, TrafficLight and Netcraft did you see what an exaggeration on my part? Now with the arrival of Osprey Browser Protection I don't need them anymore. But I think I know what you're worried about. Just to refresh your memory, take a look at the test screenshots on the eicar website. Osprey Browser Protection also blocks urls with executables, how cool is that? You can test it yourself and draw your own conclusions. ;)
Click to expand...
I also re-watched @Shadowra video test and saw he used all 14 ON, so as of last I had already done what you sugest above, ie, using all 14 in Osprey and disable MbamBG.
 
  • Like
  • +Reputation
Reactions: piquiteco, Shadowra and Jonny Quest
silversurfer said:
Osprey Browser Protection 1.1.6 (already available for Chrome and Firefox).
Click to expand...
fyi fwiw my fedora firefox still has Osprey 1.1.5 so I am correct that Osprey will update automatically, or is it a manual update, or I have to throw a switch...? now is 24apr 18:14z
 
Kongo said:
Why has the option to remove the allowlist been removed? It would be much more convenient with a small gearwheel and some basic settings within the extension.
Click to expand...
Btw Kongo since I know you sometimes find all kinds of malicious pages I was wondering if you so far seen anything that isn't detected by osprey as in my experience so far it's very rare to find any page undetected like incredibly hard even tried looking in GitHub for malicious links by looking for cheats etc and even those are usually blocked too as some providers in osprey have methods to detect even zero day pishing to some degree (DNS.eu for example )

Btw have you found any false positives as with all providers enabled I have just a few even when I specifically go to piracy sites , illegal fourms etc
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf_The_Grey, simmerskool and Kongo
Vitali Ortzi said:
Btw Kongo since I know you sometimes find all kinds of malicious pages I was wondering if you so far seen anything that isn't detected by osprey as in my experience so far it's very rare to find any page undetected like incredibly hard even tried looking in GitHub for malicious links by looking for cheats etc and even those are usually blocked too as some providers in osprey have methods to detect even zero day pishing to some degree (DNS.eu for example )

Btw have you found any false positives as with all providers enabled I have just a few even when I specifically go to piracy sites , illegal fourms etc
Click to expand...
Most of them are random finds, but so far it blocks anything I throw at it. But not really surprising with all those filters. 😄
 
  • Like
  • Applause
  • +Reputation
Reactions: simmerskool, silversurfer, Jonny Quest and 3 others
Vitali Ortzi said:
Firefox is supposed by default to auto update extensions
Click to expand...
yes it is set to default (auto) and today when I opened firefox on fedora Osprey is 1.1.6. just checking as I rarely check extension versions absent some perceived issue
 
Vitali Ortzi said:
Btw Kongo

Btw have you found any false positives as with all providers enabled I have just a few even when I specifically go to piracy sites , illegal fourms etc
Click to expand...
I got a false+ yesterday after I activated CIRA Canadian Shield DNS -- I left it blocked for now but I'm 99.99% sure it was a false+ -- a link from a good email, I should get that email again today and I'll see what it does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jonny Quest, Morro, rashmi and 1 other person

You may also like...