Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Marko :)" data-source="post: 1123229" data-attributes="member: 39702">Even if someone uses it with SmartScreen only, it benefits from privacy perspective as the SmartScreen sends entire URL, along with all parameters. While Osprey only sends path.I&#039;d include all providers and allow users to select their desired level of protection other than removing specific providers; I think it&#039;s much better approach.For example, [USER=121741]@Foulest[/USER] could add three levels of protection (easy, medium, hard and custom)&nbsp; with user being asked immediately upon installation of the extension what level of protection it wants. And obviously, there should be description of all three/four modes.Easy the one being recommended as it offers reasonable amount of protection without false positives.Medium should offer more protection with rare false positives.Hard best level of protection with greater chances of false positives.Custom would be selected in case user enables/disables or makes combination of providers from each category.This way, the most advanced users are covered, as well as those not so tech-wise. Additionally, I&#039;d make a product more privacy focused by sending all the requests through proxy server, so user&#039;s IP addresses is protected and people wouldn&#039;t need to use VPN for privacy. For me, personally, it isn&#039;t viable to be connected 24/7 to VPN as it decreases speed and websites constantly ask for captcha.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Marko :), post: 1123229, member: 39702"] Even if someone uses it with SmartScreen only, it benefits from privacy perspective as the SmartScreen sends entire URL, along with all parameters. While Osprey only sends path. I'd include all providers and allow users to select their desired level of protection other than removing specific providers; I think it's much better approach. For example, [USER=121741]@Foulest[/USER] could add three levels of protection ([COLOR=rgb(65, 168, 95)]easy[/COLOR], [COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]medium[/COLOR], [COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]hard[/COLOR] and [COLOR=rgb(71, 85, 119)]custom[/COLOR]) with user being asked immediately upon installation of the extension what level of protection it wants. And obviously, there should be description of all three/four modes. [COLOR=rgb(65, 168, 95)]Easy [/COLOR]the one being recommended as it offers reasonable amount of protection without false positives. [COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]Medium [/COLOR]should offer more protection with rare false positives. [COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]Hard [/COLOR]best level of protection with greater chances of false positives. [COLOR=rgb(71, 85, 119)]Custom [/COLOR]would be selected in case user enables/disables or makes combination of providers from each category. This way, the most advanced users are covered, as well as those not so tech-wise. Additionally, I'd make a product more privacy focused by sending all the requests through proxy server, so user's IP addresses is protected and people wouldn't need to use VPN for privacy. For me, personally, it isn't viable to be connected 24/7 to VPN as it decreases speed and websites constantly ask for captcha. [/QUOTE]

Verification