>debian disabled chromium extensions for "security"

That does not happen in Edge

>>59467075
Because there aren't any extensions in the first place.

File: 1475179275943.gif (673KB, 475x350px) Image search: [Google]

673KB, 475x350px

>debian

>>59466948
Of course they did. They used to install a closed-source extension to record whatever the user was saying with no way to disable it. Now they will download a DRM extension.

You must be a fool to use Chromium. It's a more limited Chrome and the privacy is nothing but placebo, since nobody has audited the code and Google has been proven to download proprietary shit to user's PC without any input.

If you really want to be fucked in the ass by Google, a simple command-line option is enough to re-enable extensions. Or just download Google Chrome and call it a day, you fool.

>>59466948
I've been saying this for years! Debian devs are fucking stubborn autists. They focus on the stupidest shit and won't let it go. Meanwhile, the security for Debian slips further and further down the tubes. It's literally the worst Linux distro security-wise and is dragging down the good name of Linux.Fuck them.

>>59467117
Enjoy your ad exploits retard.

>>59467158
>It's literally the worst Linux distro security-wise

And you base this on what?

>>59467167
Block ads at hosts file or firewall. Or better yet, use a browser that doesn't actively try to track and spy on you.

>>59467210
>use a browser that doesn't actively try to track and spy on you
good luck with that.

File: its_shit.png (40KB, 801x510px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 801x510px

>>59467200

>>59467241
Palemoon

>>59467352
lol no

>>59467300
>Unsourced list of meaningless numbers given for vulnerabilities with no further explanation or gradation for severity, ranking Debian at the bottom and evidently produced in an era when Sun was still a company

sugoi

>>59467210
Hosts file is a terrible way to block ads.
It's not intended to have your OS do the work of a DNS server.
Firewall is ok.

>>59467300
>Debian is the worst Linux distro security-wise
>posts as proof a list where Redhat is clearly worse
>posts as proof a list where """"""""Linux""""""" is clearly even worse
can't get this type of comedy on any other board

File: IMG_0810-475x475.jpg (34KB, 475x475px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 475x475px

>>59466948
Is this what font rendering looks like on debian?

>>59468188
Learn to read. Redhat has less vulnerabilities/software (6.7, while debian has twice as many).

>>59467300
Linux vulnerabilities MAGA.

>>59469169

fewer. still doesn't answer the question which year that data is from.

>>59469169

LOL are you retarded? vulnerabilities/software don't mean shit, only the total amount matters.

>Using (((pale moon)))

>>59467300
>So many vulns, it has been separated
from Linux.
Pretty pathetic,desu.

>>59466948
https://lwn.net/Articles/717239/

>>59470154
Linux is evil communist software. Kill (((stallman))) and kill Linus. Free software only exists to kill whites.

>>59467925
Hello mozilla shill

File: Maisie_Smith.jpg (93KB, 634x725px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 634x725px

>>59466948

Have 56.0.2924.76 installed and extensions work fine.