Topic: is this true?

There is indeed a 'history', its the personal privacy information they collect. What do you think they make a commission from? They make that commission from the collection of personal privacy information collected which includes the use history and searches from users of the Epic browser.

Claiming there is no 'WebRTC leak' issue with the Epic browser is deceptive misrepresentation. It has nothing to do with it because their proxy provider can still collect that IP information when one passes through the proxies used by the Epic browser, proxies designed to have the capability to collect such so their proxies provider (SpotFlux) can also make a buck from personal privacy information collection. Hidden Reflex, the creators of the Epic browser, has an agreement with SpotFlux that allows SpotFlux to also collect personal privacy information from users of the Epic browser. The Epic browser uses a version of the 'free' access to proxies which SpotFlux provides to its users of the free use of the SpotFlux vpn, SpotFlux tells you on their web site they collect personal privacy information from the users of the 'free' side of their service. SpotFlux is able to extract the real ISP IP address, even if one is on a VPN, from the connections through their proxies and connect it to the proxy provided IP address as in 'ISP-assigned-IP' = 'SpotFlux-driven-proxy-IP'.

No "Canvas" fingerprinting? What a joke. For those that do not know, "Canvas" fingerprinting is only one of a number of, what is called, browser fingerprinting techniques for tracking online users that allows websites to uniquely identify and track visitors using HTML5 canvas elements instead of other techniques. These other techniques still exist and are used, they do not suddenly vanish because the Epic browser might not include the HTML5 "Canvas" fingerprinting capability. The exclusion of "Canvas" fingerprinting does nothing to prevent browser fingerprinting techniques from being used nor does it prevent use of other techniques for collection of other personal privacy information collected through use of the Epic browser.

Saying there is no "Canvas" fingerprinting, WebRTC issues, no history, and a myriad of other things claimed for the Epic browser is like saying because one marble is removed from a jar of 100 marbles it means there are no more marbles in the jar.  Saying these things for the Epic browser as a means to support the perception that it is somehow a 'privacy' browser is deceptive misrepresentation.

Its not really a 'privacy' browser and is 'misrepresented' by its creators (Hidden Reflex) to take advantage of 'privacy' paranoia so as to get as many to install it as possible so they can make a buck from the personal privacy information they collect from the users of the Epic browser. The more that use it the more money they make. Its a 'referral marketing' scam tool technique that's been polished up to look all bright and shiny to take advantage of 'privacy' paranoia. Its a reversal of that scam technique where one gets notified they have won a 'free' something and to collect it all they need to do is send some money to such and such. In the case of the Epic browser, they give you the browser for free and then make money from you using it. Its designed to collect personal privacy information from its users for the specific purpose of Hidden Reflex making commission revenue by selling that personal privacy information to 'third parties', advertisers, and the information broker industry.

and... > https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/f … ment_30439

Any company/entity that makes revenue (commissions in this case) from the use of their 'free' something is not really your friend, the bottom line is the money and the money will win every time.

privateinternetaccess.com/forum/discussion/17955/epic-privacy-browser

Re: is this true?

Wow, that person has some personal issues it seems and very strong opinions about us.

One basic idea that person is trying to get across that it's not possible to be completely private is true -- neither we nor anyone not even TOR can claim that.  That doesn't mean you don't try or give up.  There are many fingerprinting techniques but it so happens that canvas fingerprinting is the most prevalent one used commercially to track users, so it's the key one to block. 

We need to update the FAQ, spotflux no longer powers our proxy and hasn't for quite sometime.  They also never collected nor sold any personal data.

We have never sold any personal privacy information ever.  In fact, we cut off all our revenues rather than release users' personal information to Google.  So that is a complete lie and making such false claims is illegal -- we may try to hold that anonymous commentator responsible if we can figure out who it is.

Re: is this true?

"that 'Administrator' making that response is delusional. I will not go into the whole thing, already said mostly, but will touch on these items:

The Epic fact says in their own words (the words of Hidden Reflex which is the company behind the Epic browser - the use of 'Epic' here is synonymous with Hidden Reflex) they earn "...commission on searches we drive" (commission is revenue you idiot) but contrary to that their faq also said "We believe that what you browse and search should be private. Your searches and browsing are no one’s business but your own." - so, if its no ones business what an Epic browser user searches or where they browse (you are also browsing when you search) .... yeah ok Epic, idiots, searches are also 'personal privacy information' and also according to Epic such things are privacy things also, and they earn, according to their faq, "...commission on searches we drive" (commission is revenue you idiot)  - then they are selling 'personal privacy information' they made their business contrary to their own words in their Faq that it was no one else's business. So apparently Epic does believe that those searches they drive for a user are also someone else's business namely the business of Epic. Yes Epic, you have sold that personal privacy information, how else does Epic earn "...commission on searches we drive", do you supply gerbils or maybe what you think are your good looks, and get commission for that? No you don't, you get commission, according to your own faq, from the searches you drive and a persons searches are 'personal privacy information'. To earn commission you provided something to get that commission and commission is revenue, if you provide that something to get that commission then you sold that something for that commission, if you make money from supplying it then you sold it, and that something was 'personal privacy information'. It can't be "no one’s business" but the user if Epic is making commission on it, Epic makes it their business contrary to their own words.

So an Epic browser user 'personal privacy information' was the business of the user, Epic, spotflux, and anyone else Epic or spotflux would supply that user 'personal privacy information' to so Epic can "earn commission".   

In addition that 'administrator' is further in delusion because spotflux does collect that information passing through their 'proxies' - the epic proxies used were a version of the free spotflux proxy service from which they do collect such information which spotflux, according to spotflux, supplies on to others so it is not true, as that delusional 'administrator' put it, that spotflux "never collected nor sold any personal data" because searches are 'personal privacy information data'.

No, it is not a lie, nor is it false, nor is it "illegal" to talk about Epic based upon what they say in their own faq and words. I suggest that 'administrator' find out what the word 'illegal' means before tossing it around. Yep, your right I have some strong opinions about Epic because I have an issue with, and strong opinions about, the internet community privacy being duped into what is basically a 'referral marketing' type scam tool technique disguised as a browser put forth like its a privacy browser when in reality you are selling off that 'personal privacy information' to make commission for what according to Epic is suppose to be "no one’s business" but the user and which Epic makes their business to earn "comission" and the business of others as well.

It is not really a 'privacy' browser and it is 'misrepresented', deliberately.

Ohhhh i'm all scared, some 'admin' person working for and/or on behalf of Epic says they "may try to hold that anonymous commentator responsible if we can figure out who it is. " - you frigging idiots, even if you know who it is there would not be one thing you could do about it. Its fair use and non-defamatory speech based upon your own public Faq as it was at the time it I wrote what I wrote, and still is now. If you do not want things talked about then don't make them public. Just what are you going to hold someone responsible for, telling the truth based upon Epic's own words?

And you "sasha123", you tried to solicit me via PM to send you a "pia freemium account. lifetime or 1 years" or share my PIA account with you, for which I turned you down flatly and told you "I am not going to share my PIA account with you" and told you to  "purchase the service like every one else", and I told you "Go away and stop harassing me with your nonsense and unsolicited communications PM's." what an idiot you are. So why don't you run back over to the Epic forums and stop trying to proliferate here this scamming you are involved in. "

https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/f … cy-browser

Re: is this true?

alok wrote:

Wow, that person has some personal issues it seems and very strong opinions about us.

One basic idea that person is trying to get across that it's not possible to be completely private is true -- neither we nor anyone not even TOR can claim that.  That doesn't mean you don't try or give up.  There are many fingerprinting techniques but it so happens that canvas fingerprinting is the most prevalent one used commercially to track users, so it's the key one to block. 

We need to update the FAQ, spotflux no longer powers our proxy and hasn't for quite sometime.  They also never collected nor sold any personal data.

We have never sold any personal privacy information ever.  In fact, we cut off all our revenues rather than release users' personal information to Google.  So that is a complete lie and making such false claims is illegal -- we may try to hold that anonymous commentator responsible if we can figure out who it is.

Re: is this true?

Has Epic development ceased? If you have no revenue, it's relatively easy to speculate that you won't be able to continue supporting development. I note that there are no recent posts on the user forum, and I note that, at least on my Mac, I can no longer browse anywhere that's not in my own cache (a message appears saying that the site has an invalid proxy).

Alok, if this gets to you, I'd be grateful for a reply, because I've been using the Epic browser for about a year. I did just discover the 2014 "Business Insider" article that discusses how Google refused to grant you an exemption to their "no masked IP addresses" rule (I'm not sophisticated enough to know whether their public reasoning is accurate).