@qutebrowser update today with some "Major Changes"
@sotolf @metalune @bbbhltz @qutebrowser @the_compiler Sorry but your comment doesn't make much sense. I think Google is a bit more capable of producing a secure browser compared to johndoe. But that was not my intention here.
How can you be so sure that what a big company like google which is a company built on using your personal information to sell ads is going to protect you more than any other project? Also if you look into the code you'll see that the project is built on top on QT-WebEngine, which is the same web rendering engine used in Chrome.
@sotolf @samurro @metalune
The first time I used Qutebrowser I was not as interested in digital privacy as I am today. I liked using it because it was pretty light, fast enough, and gave me some more screen real estate. The key bindings made it easy to get around the web too. Today, I don't consider team size when choosing an app. If there is development activity, I am happy. The developer, who was tagged in my first toot, certainly has an ethical side too https://blog.qutebrowser.org/paying-it-forward.html which is good.
@samurro @bbbhltz @sotolf @metalune Of course I can't prove the absence of security issues. Still, like mentioned in that FAQ entry, qutebrowser's surface for security-relevant issues is relatively small, because it doesn't need to take care of network requests, rendering, etc. itself - that's all handled by the underlying QtWebEngine/Chromium. I've also been toying with the idea of paying someone for a security audit, but I suspect that's going to be expensive for a donation-funded project.
It is not developed by a single person. The actual browsing engine is QtWebEngine which in turn takes it's code from Chromium.
Point 7: Is qutebrowser secure?
Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.