Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.microsoft.windows > #1568 > unrolled thread

Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser?

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.microsoft.windows

Contents

  Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-05-16 20:42 +0100
    Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Nic <Nic@none.net> - 2022-05-16 17:00 -0400
      Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2022-05-17 07:44 +0100
        Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-05-17 08:24 +0100
          Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2022-05-17 09:51 +0100
            Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-05-17 10:54 +0100
          Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2022-05-17 15:09 +0200
            Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> - 2022-05-17 14:54 +0100
              Re: Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser? Nic <Nic@none.net> - 2022-05-17 11:48 -0400

#1568 — Do you have useful knowledge or experience on the use of the Browsar privacy browser?

Any feelings on utility (or lack thereof) of the Browsar privacy browser?
 <https://browzar.com/>

In testing only a few minutes this morning, I found this "Browsar" private 
browsing experience somewhat unlike any other browser I've ever used.
 <https://browzar.com/download/BrowzarBlack2000-98.zip>

I was reading this police Windows 7 to 10 comparative study of a 
different privacy browser (where they used freeware forensics):
 <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>
 Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.zip
 Size: 207499 bytes (202 KiB)
 SHA256: EFFF5FC2C265C7FD853CD76EB0D4193C2B491341BD7AD3A29A194022AD5BB114
 Unzipped it contains just the portable executable (there is no installer):
 Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
 Size: 226976 bytes (221 KiB)
 SHA256: C83AB2CDA88BB1A04D7F9B43D8E01CF5E7ED9576F433D9545BC180406AA935FF

 https://browzar.com/download/BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
 Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
 Size: 226976 bytes (221 KiB)
 SHA256: C83AB2CDA88BB1A04D7F9B43D8E01CF5E7ED9576F433D9545BC180406AA935FF

Every day I try to learn more about how to protect our privacy on the net.
Hence I was reading this police report analyzing another privacy browser...
 <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>

Which used forensics from the following on Windows & and 10 (compared)
 *Process Monitor* 
  an advanced monitoring tool that shows real-time file system, registry, 
  and process thread activity;

 *Regshot* 
  an open-source utility that allows snapshots to be taken pre- and 
  post-software installation in order to record registry changes 
  on the system;

 *TCPView* 
  a tool that shows detailed listings of all TCP 
  (Transmission control Protocol) & UDP (User Datagram Protocol) 
  endpoints as well as network connection status;

 *Registry viewer 
  software that allows analysis of the windows registry system;

 *FTK Imager* 
  forensics software that is used to capture RAM dumps 
  and protected files data on a live system;
 
 *WireShark* 
  Network protocol analyser that identifies all network traffic;
 
 *ChromeHistoryView* 
  freeware that allows an examiner to view History database records;

 *ChromeCacheView* 
  freeware that allows the examiner to view cache entries.

When it mentioned Browsar in passing... 
 "Upon closing the browsing session, Browzar removed all traces of
  web browser activity. However, using a combination of forensic tools 
  and techniques, evidence (including pictures, keyword searches, and
  URLs) was easily recovered in both the memory and in the pagefile 
  (Warren, El-Sheikh & Le-Khac 2017)." allows analysis of the windows
  registry system;

When it mentioned Browsar in passing... 
 "Upon closing the browsing session, Browzar removed all traces of
  web browser activity. However, using a combination of forensic tools 
  and techniques, evidence (including pictures, keyword searches, and
  URLs) was easily recovered in both the memory and in the pagefile 
  (Warren, El-Sheikh & Le-Khac 2017)."

Any feelings on the (seemingly unique?) Browsar privacy browser?
-- 
Usenet is a world-wide team sport where purposefully helpful kind-hearted 
adults help each other and learn by pooling our individual capabilities.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1569

On 5/16/22 3:42 PM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Any feelings on utility (or lack thereof) of the Browsar privacy browser?
> <https://browzar.com/>
>
> In testing only a few minutes this morning, I found this "Browsar" 
> private browsing experience somewhat unlike any other browser I've 
> ever used.
> <https://browzar.com/download/BrowzarBlack2000-98.zip>
>
> I was reading this police Windows 7 to 10 comparative study of a 
> different privacy browser (where they used freeware forensics):
> <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>
> Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.zip
> Size: 207499 bytes (202 KiB)
> SHA256: EFFF5FC2C265C7FD853CD76EB0D4193C2B491341BD7AD3A29A194022AD5BB114
> Unzipped it contains just the portable executable (there is no 
> installer):
> Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
> Size: 226976 bytes (221 KiB)
> SHA256: C83AB2CDA88BB1A04D7F9B43D8E01CF5E7ED9576F433D9545BC180406AA935FF
>
> https://browzar.com/download/BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
> Name: BrowzarBlack2000-98.exe
> Size: 226976 bytes (221 KiB)
> SHA256: C83AB2CDA88BB1A04D7F9B43D8E01CF5E7ED9576F433D9545BC180406AA935FF
>
> Every day I try to learn more about how to protect our privacy on the 
> net.
> Hence I was reading this police report analyzing another privacy 
> browser...
> <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>
>
> Which used forensics from the following on Windows & and 10 (compared)
> *Process Monitor*  an advanced monitoring tool that shows real-time 
> file system, registry,  and process thread activity;
>
> *Regshot*  an open-source utility that allows snapshots to be taken 
> pre- and  post-software installation in order to record registry 
> changes  on the system;
>
> *TCPView*  a tool that shows detailed listings of all TCP 
>  (Transmission control Protocol) & UDP (User Datagram Protocol) 
>  endpoints as well as network connection status;
>
> *Registry viewer  software that allows analysis of the windows 
> registry system;
>
> *FTK Imager*  forensics software that is used to capture RAM dumps 
>  and protected files data on a live system;
>
> *WireShark*  Network protocol analyser that identifies all network 
> traffic;
>
> *ChromeHistoryView*  freeware that allows an examiner to view History 
> database records;
>
> *ChromeCacheView*  freeware that allows the examiner to view cache 
> entries.
>
> When it mentioned Browsar in passing... "Upon closing the browsing 
> session, Browzar removed all traces of
>  web browser activity. However, using a combination of forensic tools 
>  and techniques, evidence (including pictures, keyword searches, and
>  URLs) was easily recovered in both the memory and in the pagefile 
>  (Warren, El-Sheikh & Le-Khac 2017)." allows analysis of the windows
>  registry system;
>
> When it mentioned Browsar in passing... "Upon closing the browsing 
> session, Browzar removed all traces of
>  web browser activity. However, using a combination of forensic tools 
>  and techniques, evidence (including pictures, keyword searches, and
>  URLs) was easily recovered in both the memory and in the pagefile 
>  (Warren, El-Sheikh & Le-Khac 2017)."
>
> Any feelings on the (seemingly unique?) Browsar privacy browser?

I never heard of Browsar, but it is clear that the browser wars are 
getting caught up on the important points of private communication on 
the net. The thing that puzzles me is how will Usenet survive after the 
wars.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1570

Nic wrote:

> I never heard of Browsar

Me neither (it should be spelt with a Z not an S) looks like it's just an IE 
wrapper, they claim it's great for banking or cloud apps

it doesn't work with my banks, office365, dropbox, or any part of google that 
requires a sign-in

seems to barely work with amazon, all-in-all about as dead as I'd expect IE to 
be nowadays

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1571

Andy Burns wrote:

>> I never heard of Browsar
> 
> Me neither (it should be spelt with a Z not an S) 

My fault for spelling it with an "s", as it's BrowZar as in 
 <https://browzar.com/>
 <https://browzar.com/keyfeatures.php>
 <https://browzar.com/help.php>

As you can tell from your tests, it's somewhat unlike any other browser out
there in that it's small and it does stuff that it "says" is for privacy.

From their online FAQ:
 *What is so different about Browzar?*
 <https://browzar.com/help.php>
 "Currently there is no way of privately surfing the internet that is as
 simple to use as Browzar. All standard internet browsers by default store
 information about what websites have been viewed and what you have
 searched for. Browzar does not do any of this. It does not store any
 history, cache or cookies and does not use auto-complete. This means 
 that people sharing a computer with others can enjoy the freedom to 
 surf in private."

However, note the police report which said that forensics still work.
 <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>

> looks like it's just an IE wrapper, they claim it's great for banking or cloud apps

Thank you for testing it as I had never heard of it until I saw it
mentioned in that police report, which I was perusing to learn more how
they do freeware forensics (which is how I found that police report).

As a side note, it's interesting the police concentrated on freeware, just
like I do! :)

That's interesting if it's IE based since most browsers are Chromium or
Mozilla based nowadays, as far as I know. How can you tell that it's IE?

Plus, it's just the executable and nothing else (apparently). Their online
FAQ says to delete it you just delete the executable and that's it. As I
recall, IE was a bitch to fully delete since it polluted the registry.

What's _different_ about Browzar is a whole bunch of things, one of which
is that there is no "installer" - there's just the executable and that's it
(although I didn't look to see if they muck with the System Registry keys).

What it says on its home page is also somewhat unique.
 1. Doesn't save Cookies, History, Temp files, Passwords, Cache
 2. Secure delete (upon every closing but the police found otherwise)
 3. Great for Banking and Cloud applications (as you noted it claimed)
 4. Automatically cleans up when you've finished (what does that mean?)
 5. Carry it with you on a USB stick (that might be useful)

> it doesn't work with my banks, office365, dropbox, or any part of google that 
> requires a sign-in

Thanks for testing that. I never sign in to banks, office365, or dropbox or
even Google (since I use Thunderbird for Google email) so I wouldn't have
known that BrowZar doesn't work for such sites. 

But the Browzar online FAQ claims the following:  
 *How do banking websites work with Browzar?*
 <https://browzar.com/help.php>
 "You can use Browzar to securely do your electronic banking 
  just like you can with any other browser."

Do you have a suspicion as to why Browzar doesn't work with those sites?

> seems to barely work with amazon, all-in-all about as dead as I'd expect IE to 
> be nowadays

Looking deeper into the online FAQ, it says this about banking & shopping:
 *Does Browzar store cookies? If so, why?*
 "Browzar only ever stores cookies temporarily, automatically deleting
  them when you close the programme. For many sites, such as internet
  banking or shopping sites, it is necessary to store cookies to keep 
  you logged into the site or hold shopping cart contents while you 
  perform your transactions.

  If you visit a site using Browzar where a cookie for that site 
  already existed on the computer prior to you using Browzar, 
  the cookie will be ignored."

Do you think the reason Browzar didn't work well for you was related to the
banking & shopping sites wanting to have cookies previously stored on your
PC?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1572

Andy Burnelli wrote:

> How can you tell that it's IE?

In their FAQ, they say they can be such a small .exe because they rely on the IE 
components being installed as part of windows, so they just invoke that as an 
embedded window with their own skin around it ...

IE is so far behind now on HTML, CSS and JS features, I'd expect most sites to 
be broken in some way.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1573

Andy Burns wrote:

> In their FAQ, they say they can be such a small .exe because they rely on the IE 
> components being installed as part of windows

Ah. Good catch. Thanks. It's actually all over that FAQ & Help... 
which I missed 'cuz I didn't read them. My bad. Your good. :)

Here are some of the IE references in the help & FAQ.

 <https://browzar.com/help.php>
 "Browzar is an IE shell browser"

 "The minimum requirements for Browzar are: Windows 98 Second Edition (SE)
  and Internet Explorer (IE) 5.5."

 <https://browzar.com/keyfeatures.php>
 "*Browzar is based on Internet Explorer*:
 Love it or hate it: that's just the way it is. We decided to build 
 Browzar this way because wherever you go on the Planet, IE is likely 
 to be installed on any Windows PC. This means that the Browzar 
 software download can be kept very small (only 204K), and there's 
 no need for installation: unlike other Browsers, which are often 
 several Mbytes in size and require installation to run. 
 With Browzar you just click and go..."

 "From version 2.0 onwards Browzar no longer supports the downloading 
 of ActiveX components. This is a security measure to protect you and 
 the computer you are using. If you visit a site which requires ActiveX,
 Browzar will simply not download the ActiveX component. In the event 
 that you visit a site using Browzar which has already been visited 
 using Internet Explorer and an ActiveX component has already been
 downloaded to the computer you are using, then this ActiveX component 
 will still run in Browzar."

 "Auto-complete works a bit like predictive text. When you are inputting 
 a search term or web address to your computer it guesses what you are 
 going to search for based on things that you inputted in the past. 
 This instantly reveals sites that you have visited before to anyone 
 using your computer or looking over your shoulder when you are searching
 the web. Browzar blocks auto-complete and doesn't remember what you 
 typed whilst you were browsing or searching. When someone next uses 
 IE on the computer which you last used Browzar, your search terms will 
 not appear in any auto-complete lists."

 "Browzar deletes any cookies created during any Browzar session. 
 Cookies are deleted at the end of the Browzar session as part of 
 the Cleanup process.

 With earlier versions of Browzar, we received complaints from users 
 that when visiting some web sites they would appear to be logged in 
 with someone else's details. This was due to the fact that previous us
 of the PC with Internet Explorer users had visited sites and opted 
 to be 'remembered' when they returned to them and a cookie was placed 
 on the computer. Browzar simply read the cookies and displayed sites 
 in the logged in state.

 The good news is that we have listened to our users and made it so 
 that Browzar now ignores any existing cookies. So now you won't see 
 anyone else's Amazon profile, Google e-mail, or anything like that.

 Whilst using Browzar, if you choose a website to remember you, when 
 you close Browzar any cookies created during the Browzar session 
 are deleted"

 "Browzar now has all the Function and Ctrl shortcuts available in 
 Internet Explorer."

etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1574

On 17/05/2022 08:24, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> 
> However, note the police report which said that forensics still work.
> <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>

That's not a police report, it's a research paper published here:
Journal of Information Warfare, Volume 17, Number 1, 2018.

Allegedly, although I can't find it on the Journal's site.

>> looks like it's just an IE wrapper, they claim it's great for banking 
>> or cloud apps
> 
> Thank you for testing it as I had never heard of it until I saw it
> mentioned in that police report, which I was perusing to learn more how
> they do freeware forensics (which is how I found that police report).
> 
> As a side note, it's interesting the police concentrated on freeware, just
> like I do! :)

The police don't. Researchers do as it's cheaper to do research that way.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1575

Chris wrote:

>> However, note the police report which said that forensics still work.
>> <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf>
> 
> That's not a police report, it's a research paper published here:
> Journal of Information Warfare, Volume 17, Number 1, 2018.
> 
> Allegedly, although I can't find it on the Journal's site.

Hmmm... I only ran into it while looking up freeware tools to do forensics 
on the PC, but I just re-opened it and it said, right at the beginning, 
"Ottawa Police" but I looked deeper and it has a small "1" next to it, 
which indicates that the primary author "A Reed" works at the Ottawa Police 
apparently, whereas the secondary & tertiary authors are at the "Forensics 
and Security Research Group".

My bad. I apologize. I didn't take the police part too seriously anyway, as 
the research paper seemed rather sophomoric for a professional publication.

For all I know, it could be just a final exam or whatever, since I only ran 
into it while digging up forensic tools to test on Windows.

>> As a side note, it's interesting the police concentrated on freeware, just
>> like I do! :)
> 
> The police don't. Researchers do as it's cheaper to do research that way.

I'm not sure how this trio is funded, but in the abstract they state:
 "This study identifies the manner in which the browser functions 
  during use, where evidence can be recovered after use, as well 
  as the tools and effective presentation of the recovered material."

All I can say is that they're promulgating a half dozen freeware forensic 
tools, which are the keywords that brought that research paper to my 
attention - and - once in the research paper - they brought BrowZar to my 
attention.

That's kind of how learning happens sometimes... 
-- 
I simply asked about the brozar browser here, to learn more about it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1576

On 5/17/22 9:54 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> However, note the police report which said that forensics still work.
>>> <https://forensicsandsecurity.com/papers/PrivateWebBrowserForensics.pdf> 
>>>
>>
>> That's not a police report, it's a research paper published here:
>> Journal of Information Warfare, Volume 17, Number 1, 2018.
>>
>> Allegedly, although I can't find it on the Journal's site.
>
> Hmmm... I only ran into it while looking up freeware tools to do 
> forensics on the PC, but I just re-opened it and it said, right at the 
> beginning, "Ottawa Police" but I looked deeper and it has a small "1" 
> next to it, which indicates that the primary author "A Reed" works at 
> the Ottawa Police apparently, whereas the secondary & tertiary authors 
> are at the "Forensics and Security Research Group".
>
> My bad. I apologize. I didn't take the police part too seriously 
> anyway, as the research paper seemed rather sophomoric for a 
> professional publication.
>
> For all I know, it could be just a final exam or whatever, since I 
> only ran into it while digging up forensic tools to test on Windows.
>
>>> As a side note, it's interesting the police concentrated on 
>>> freeware, just
>>> like I do! :)
>>
>> The police don't. Researchers do as it's cheaper to do research that 
>> way.
>
> I'm not sure how this trio is funded, but in the abstract they state:
> "This study identifies the manner in which the browser functions 
>  during use, where evidence can be recovered after use, as well  as 
> the tools and effective presentation of the recovered material."
>
> All I can say is that they're promulgating a half dozen freeware 
> forensic tools, which are the keywords that brought that research 
> paper to my attention - and - once in the research paper - they 
> brought BrowZar to my attention.
>
> That's kind of how learning happens sometimes... 
I would think that there are Linux versions that would work better at 
looking at windows installations and the contents of a hard drive.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.microsoft.windows

csiph-web