Chromium - Privacy-Focused Builds

@Windows_Security Unfortunately the majority of builds there are 64-bit. However, there has still be some interest in 32-bit builds. For example, you can get the second-mode-recent stable channel build (https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v54.0.2840.59-r414607-win32) 54.0.2840.59 there right now. Although that particular build does not have CFG enabled. Now that they have two dedicated builders over there, maybe they can produce more 32-bit builds.

 

There's also 56.0.2899.0 available in 32bits. https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v56.0.2899.0-r426989-win32

 

Thx @yeL and @WildByDesign for the links. Does this 56.0.2899.0 has Control Flow Guard enabled?

What is also interesting development is ignition, see other forum thread

 

Yes, I just confirmed with Process Hacker that 32-bit 56.0.2899.0 does indeed have CFG enabled.

Thanks for the Ignition link.

 

Upping this great thread to prevent it to drowning into lost pages below first page horizon

Woolyss updated to 56.0.2899.0 (426989)

 

@Windows_Security The main builder over there has compiled 64-bit and 32-bit builds this time for stable channel, good news!
64-bit: https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v54.0.2840.87-r414607-win64
32-bit: https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v54.0.2840.87-r414607-win32

The 32-bit build may not be PGO optimized, although I have not confirmed yet.

EDIT: I just confirmed what I had suspected. The 32-bit does include the Control Flow Guard patch backport which is fantastic. But it is not PGO optimized. But to be quite honest, if I had to choose between the two, I would choose CFG for sure.

EDIT2: Also, I recall reading a while back some Google developers mentioning how the performance gain from PGO optimization is minimal for 32-bit compilations in comparison to 64-bit compilations.

 

Chromium stable release at Woolyss was updated to 54.0.2840.99: https://chromium.woolyss.com/?stb=1

 

@Minimalist Thanks for the heads up on the updated Stable channel builds. Also, as I understand it, Nik has updated the GN compile-time arguments for improved PGO. This build also includes CFG backport. At the moment there is only the 64-bit build available for this Stable channel build but we'll update here when/if a 32-bit build shows up as well.

 

32-bit stable channel 54.0.2840.99 is up now.
Link: https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v54.0.2840.99-r414607-win32

 

On website of HenryPP (guy who makes available Chromium stable version of Chrome) there is an auto updater available to automatically update his chromium version

http://www.henrypp.org/product/chrlauncher

 

I am confused does this have the ungoogled patches? I see nothing mentioning them on the download page.

I would love to e.g. see the http:// protocol no longer stripped off.

 

They have moved away from the ungoogled-chromium patchset because the developers (of ungoogled-chromium) were not able to keep up with the stable release builds of Chromium due to the fast pace of development and changes under the hood. Far too many issues as well. If I recall, over at Woolyss' site, they had only done one or two test builds with ungoogled-chromium just to see how well it would work (or not work).

 

thats a real shame. So it seems these are not all that different from official builds then? (assuming one wants to use the codec included version).

I suggest you edit the first post.

seems the github is still active for the patches, so was the issue woolys side?

 

Correct, Woolyss builds are aimed to be as vanilla builds as possible, trying to not deviate much from official sources. Except, as you mentioned, codecs. There is just the Control Flow Guard patch backport to Stable branch build and a few GN build related patches that are specifically to do with build process. However, you can certainly feel free to ask Jerry or Nik over there for a more detailed answer regarding specifics.

The main reasons that Woolyss site dropped ungoogled-chromium for now is because that project has quite a few outstanding issues still which can be problematic but also the fact that ungoogled-chromium project still has not updated their patch release set for Chromium 54 which was released almost a month ago now. So they are just always several weeks behind, as I understand it. And as mentioned, Woolyss site main goal is to have an as close to vanilla build compilation of Chromium so that it matches official release as best as possible and remains open source. I hope that I explained it well enough. But you can always feel free to ask Jerry or Nik and I'm sure they will be happy to answer any questions for you.

 

Chromium v55.0.2883.75 r423768 (stable) is available for 32-bit *
Link: https://github.com/henrypp/chromium/releases/tag/v55.0.2883.75-r423768-win32

* This is a bit different from usual because typically Nik releases the 64-bit build first. Anyhow, this will work for both 32-bit and 64-bit users and hopefully he releases the 64-bit shortly.

 

It wouldnt work for me my chrome routinely uses 5-6 gig of ram, I am not even sure why he even bothers making 32bit builds.

 

They've also released 64 bit version: https://chromium.woolyss.com/?stb=1

 

I would like to try the Woolyss Chromium.
I have tried the portable last stable version chrlauncher, and the installer from Woolyss, but in either case the browser won't open - page is unresponsive.
I don't get that with Google Chrome or Chromium Portable via PortableApps.com.
Could be one of me security apps? I tried adding the browser in HMPA but to no avail.
I do see WerFault running and dumps in AppData/Local/Crashdumps but I am not technical enough to figure that out.
Pity. Maybe someone here can give me a clue?
I do recall having this issue before with Chrome, but can't remember if I ever resolved it.

Edit: I gather chrlauncher downloads the Woolyss build? And if so, the sync or no sync version?

 

Does anybody experience any problems with Flash with latest version?
Default settings on my system were set to "Block sites from running Flash". I don't remember setting it that way.
Also, when I choose "Ask first before allowing sites run Flash" I have no option to run it. Right click only allows me to hide it. So if I want to run Flash I have to choose "Allow sites to run Flash". It looks like Click to play is somehow broken...

 

If I had to guess, I would suggest that it likely has something to do with the fact that Chromium builds from Woolyss' site do not have digital signatures for their binaries and that could be like a red flag for some security software. Or the security software might not like whichever portable location the Chromium build might be trying to launch from. There are quite a bit of security software types listed in your signature so it is difficult to determine what might be blocking it.

It's been a while since I last used chrlauncher. But I do recall that it has a .ini configuration file which you can edit the strings within that config file to determine which branch of Chromium builds to download. Example from config:

Code:

# Type of Chromium builds:
#
# dev-official        -> official development builds from snapshots repository (default)
# dev-codecs-sync    -> unofficial development builds with codecs from "github.com/henrypp/chromium"
# stable-codecs-sync    -> unofficial stable builds with codecs from "github.com/henrypp/chromium"
# dev-codecs-nosync    -> unofficial development builds with codecs and without the profile button from "github.com/henrypp/chromium"
# stable-codecs-nosync    -> unofficial stable builds with codecs and without the profile button from "github.com/henrypp/chromium"
#
ChromiumType=dev-codecs-sync

I would suggest staying away from Dev builds because they are unpredictable. That seems to be the default. I would go with either:

ChromiumType=stable-codecs-sync
or
ChromiumType=stable-codecs-nosync

The builds are pulled from Woolyss' site API, downloaded and extracted with chrlauncher. You can also choose within that config file how often to check for updates.

Yes, I noticed this last night as well. It seems that Chromium developers have made a change to Flash Player default settings in version 55.

So I went to chrome://settings
Advanced
Site Settings

Now I have changed it to Allow sites to run Flash, but I have also ensured that a checkmark is placed with the Ask First box.

But it still does not seem to put the icon in the top right corner of the browser which I was accustomed to, which allowed me to easily and quickly allow Flash on a site-by-site temporary basis. I'm not too comfortable or happy yet with these new changes to Flash settings.

 

I don't like it either. It seems there is no easy way to run Flash on demand only. It's probably a bug, otherwise they wouldn't leave this option in settings.

 

Thanks @WildByDesign

In Reliability Monitor I see chrome.exe 'Stopped working':

Faulting application name: chrome.exe, version: 55.0.2883.75, time stamp: 0x5841765b
Faulting module name: ntdll.dll, version: 10.0.10586.672, time stamp: 0x580ee321
Exception code: 0xc0000005
Fault offset: 0x000000000002fe34
Faulting process id: 0x10ec4
Faulting application start time: 0x01d24d75434fd5fa
Faulting application path: C:\My Portable Applications\chrlauncher\64\bin\chrome.exe
Faulting module path: C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32\ntdll.dll
Report Id: 8986b78c-2d0e-4770-ab59-3b469c874c3e
Faulting package full name:
Faulting package-relative application ID:

I have tried disabling any security software without success:

stable-codecs-nosync version. I'll just keep trying various things.

 

I just noticed this article in my RSS feeds right now:
Chrome 55 Now Blocks Flash, Uses HTML5 by Default
Link: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/software/chrome-55-now-blocks-flash-uses-html5-by-default/

 

Thanks @WildByDesign
My settings description is different than setting showed in article



Maybe it's functioning as intended and they only need to change wording in Chromium release...

 

I am seeing the same discrepancy in the settings description (the one in the middle) for Flash.

In the official Google Chrome: "Detect and run important Flash content (recommended)"
In the unofficial Chromium stable-codecs-nosync: "Ask first before allowing sites to run Flash (recommended)"

I also notice the URL bar area shows a padlock and "Secure" before the URL.