

Ask HN: Will you pay to download a fast/secure/privacy web browser? - bikamonki

App.net is gambling that some of us want a paid ad-free&#x2F;privacy social network. Given that we now do most of our computer usage inside a browser, wouldn&#x27;t some of us pay to download a broswer that:
Sandboxes each site&#x2F;session&#x2F;page
Blocks ads by default (and learns to block new ad techniques)
Runs adware&#x2F;spyware on each request (and auto-updates threats database)
Warns&#x2F;blocks phishing
Blocks &#x27;tool-bars&#x27; install
Runs TOR
Securely stores usrnms&#x2F;pwds<p>And yet does not sacrifice standards and compatibility.<p>I know that I can setup any browser plus download some tools to fulfil this wishlist but I was thinking an out-of-the-box-no-geek-only solution.<p>I would pay, would you?
======
tptacek
No. Securing a browser is extraordinarily hard, resource intensive, and thus
expensive. I would have a hard time believing any new browser project could
outdo Chromium, which is free and run by the smartest team in browser
security.

This is a little like asking if I would pay for a more secure Linux kernel,
even though there's already a grsecurity.

------
dTal
If you're doing market research and your market is the set of people who would
buy an "out-of-the-box-no-geek-only" solution, why are you asking on Hacker
News?

What do you mean by "sandboxes each site/session/page"? Which one? You can't
isolate each page from the others in a browser for the non-geek as people
expect login information to persist between tabs.

What do you mean by "Runs adware/spyware on each request"?

There are problems with bundling Tor as well. The non-geek is not equipped to
understand the caveats in its use, and if you label it with a big easy-to-
understand "privacy button" then you've engendered a false sense of security
which does more harm than good.

But no, I wouldn't pay, and I would advise my non-geek friends not to either
(not that they would anyway what with all the free solutions around). If you
have to pay, it's likely closed-source, which is a priori less secure.
However, you should know that even if there were a hungry market waiting for
you, what you want to do is a Hard Problem.

------
bikamonki
Thanks for the comments. This is no market research, I am not apt to program a
browser much less sell it.

I took me about 20min of tweaking FF to set the privacy and security to the
extent possible. I did not setup TOR b/c I think anonimity is not required for
_everyday_ browsing, plus TOR is slow and many sites do not play well with it.
I also do not need spyware/adware b/c I run Ubuntu.

I was just wondering if non-techies would be willing to pay for a browser
version/bundle that is setup like this out of the box (it can be open-source).

If I tell my mom that she's being re-targeted and profiled b/c her cookies are
enabled...she'd bring me some milk :)

------
a3n
Beyond proprietary obfuscation and unverifiability, the paradox is that it
would take a lot of convincing before I would believe that the seller of a
commercial product had any interest other than selling the commercial product.

------
lauradhamilton
No, I prefer open source browsers.

~~~
mattl
You could pay for an open source browser.

