Sign in / up

back to article Apple Safari update BORKED private browsing

At some point between Version 6.2.2 and Version 8.0.3, Apple has accidentally jettisoned private browsing in Safari. As described by Macissues, users of recent Safari versions on the newest flavours of OSX are finding that so-called “private” URLs are turning up in the SQLite database that stores Favicons. In other words, if …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    Probably not important

    Apple owners only look at apple.com.

    5 10 Reply
    1. Mark Simon
      Reply Icon

      Re: Probably not important

      What sort of comment was that … ?

      4 0 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Probably not important

        What sort of comment was that … ?

        The troll avatar I used should have been a massive clue.

        4 1 Reply
      2. CaptainBanjax
        Reply Icon

        Re: Probably not important

        A factual one more or less. Though a bit unfair, they like to use Instagram and browse the Urban Outfitters site as well.

        3 1 Reply
  2. Al fazed
    Flame

    More rubbish coding

    The last install I did of Safari on my Windows 7 machine allowed QuickTime to delete BBC iPlayer software and the TV programmes that I had downloaded to watch at a later time. And bugger me if the following two QuickTime software updates didn't repeat the deletion of BBC iPlayer and my downloads. Needless to say, Safari is now relegated to my old MAC Book, where it belongs. It's not allowed out to play anymore

    4 2 Reply
    1. Jay 2
      Reply Icon

      Re: More rubbish coding

      I'm surprised a Windows person would even install Safari on their machine (assuming it was a concious decision and didn't sneek on via an iTunes install or something). I'm a Mac user and only very rarely do I even consider using it.

      I tend to use FF or Chrome nowadays on Win/MacOS unless I just need a very brief third opinion of a website, and so have to resort to the OS' included browser.

      3 0 Reply
    2. Handy Plough
      Reply Icon
      Flame

      Re: More rubbish coding

      Sorry, Windows users don't get to whine about Safari. Internet Explorer on the Mac was a fucking travesty that we had to endure for far too long.

      0 0 Reply
      1. Sebastian A
        Reply Icon

        Re: More rubbish coding

        Had to? I would have thought that on a Mac it was optional, whereas on Windows it wasn't.

        0 0 Reply
        1. Dan 55 Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Windows

          Re: More rubbish coding

          There was a time after CyberDog and before Safari when IE was the only free web browser for the Mac and it was bundled with it for a time.

          0 0 Reply
      2. Ian Joyner Bronze badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: More rubbish coding

        >>Sorry, Windows users don't get to whine about Safari. Internet Explorer on the Mac was a fucking travesty that we had to endure for far too long.<<

        IE is a travesty on Windows. Microsoft only developed it to kill Netscape. Once they'd achieved that goal they have not been interested ever since. It's the Ballmer business model.

        0 0 Reply
  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Don't worry it will be patched.

    In non-related news the NSA need to now find a new way to track your history.

    1 1 Reply
  4. Jamie Jones Silver badge
    Mushroom

    surprised?

    At least 2 current and popular Android browsers do the same thing.

    Never rely on 'private browsing mode'!

    If you really need to do something less traceable, use something from a trusted group that specialises in this area, not some browser afterthought written by Johnny 9-5 employee.

    0 1 Reply
    1. EddieD
      Reply Icon

      Re: surprised?

      Would you care to tell us which ones, and point us at a security report?

      3 1 Reply
      1. Jamie Jones Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: surprised?

        I purposely didn't list them because I haven't reported them yet...

        However, whilst I suspect it's an unlucky coincidence, those 2 were the only 2 I've checked, leading me to conclude that 'private browsing' mode isn't really taken seriously as an option, so didn't consider it all that important.

        Based on this article, it seems I was wrong...

        0 1 Reply
        1. Jamie Jones Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: surprised?

          I've got off my arse and done something about it.

          Updates for those who are interested are here: http://forums.theregister.co.uk/forum/containing/2471257

          0 0 Reply
  5. Oninoshiko
    Pint

    I want to give a hat top to the journo who wrote this

    You actually verified the issue yourself, including (apparently) new information about when the bug was introduced. That's good work, I'd like to see it more often.

    you've earned a beer.

    5 0 Reply
    1. Dan 55 Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Up

      Re: I want to give a hat top to the journo who wrote this

      Vulture South does consistently publish a better standard of article.

      0 0 Reply

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like