The article is from an old date and got no updates, security is a moving target so it is outdated.
I agree that it’s not very up to date. Heck, I even said as such with “I’m aware that it’s a bit outdated. However, would you be able to confidently claim that nothing found within is relevant today?” (Yes, I’m @poki). That’s exactly why the bold parts were included. However, instead of answering my question, you just called it outdated to dismiss all of its claims. But, that’s not how it works, you should -instead- state if it’s relevant or not. I.e. is everything mentioned within solved? Or are some issues still standing?
Btw, if you go about duckduckgoing stuff, I actually do. However, apart from CHEF-KOCH, I couldn’t find anything on this matter. Furthermore, I couldn’t find anything on CHEF-KOCH’s credentials. So, why should I favor their opinion over Madaidan’s (that at least works on Kicksecure and Whonix)?
a debunk is not existent, thats why I miss it.
Clear. Thank you for explaining!
I requested such an article of Mozilla devs long ago. There is a damn bugzilla thread, which helps a bit, but it needs developer documentation or something.
Thank you for your effort! I tried finding the bugzilla thread but failed. Would you mind helping out?
Torbrowser needs to be secure. If the browser source cannot be trusted, or if Mozilla can be trusted more, then it makes sense to use it.
Fair. Someone who’s actually security sensitive would run it within a disposable qube anyways. And, in that case, security would have already been solved. So, Tor Browser can focus on privacy.