Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Tails 2.0.1 Released

posted by takyon on Wednesday February 24 2016, @06:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the another-one dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

A new minor release of Tails*, an operating system focussed on privacy and anonymity, has been made. In version 2.0.1 the browser was updated, fixing two security bugs. Security problems in Virtualbox, curl, OpenJDK, Kerberos, and the TIFF library were also corrected. The new version can again boot on 32-bit computers that have UEFI.

* The Amnesic Incognito Live System

Previously: TAILS Linux 1.3.2 is Released

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Tails 2.0.1 Released | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 29 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:03AM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:03AM (#309063) Journal

    compare:

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=tails+release&t=ffsb [duckduckgo.com]

    https://www.google.com/search?q=tails+release&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 [google.com]

    Clearly, they both include the search in the URL, at least with Iceweasel in Debian Wheezy.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:10AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:10AM (#309065)

    Maybe this is just a stupid concern then. So what is different about the way startpage does it?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:25AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:25AM (#309096)

    I have Javascript turned off. When I search from
    https://duckduckgo.com/ [duckduckgo.com] the results page is at https://duckduckgo.com/html [duckduckgo.com] . When I open the duckduckgo.com URL you posted, it tells me (without showing any results) "This page requires JavaScript." So it would appear that people who allow Javascript to run are taken to a results page that has the search terms in the URL, whereas people without Javascript are sent to a results page without the search terms in the URL.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:18PM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Wednesday February 24 2016, @08:18PM (#309361) Journal

      interesting. Maybe I should go back to turning off JS, but it is such an enormous hassle these days. I hate computers more and more.

    • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:11PM

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:11PM (#309388) Journal

      Without Javascript they set cookies.
      With javascript they put it in the url.

      Pick your poison.
      I'd rather have it in the url, which is transmitted over SSL than have it leaving lingering cookies on my drive.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:06PM

    by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday February 24 2016, @09:06PM (#309382) Journal

    Its ssl, in both browsers, so what is your worry here?

    The difference is Duck claims to block all tracking.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.