We ensure that (in case you come from another website like GitHub, CornHub & Co) the links you clicked here are "obfuscated" (I know it's the wrong word for it). This basically prevents third-parties and first-parties to back-track your site you came from. Theoretically this also answers the liability questions for the links here on this repository because the provider is responsible and if we "give" another provider the real link then he is responsible for the content. However, I'm not sure if that is the case here because github explicitly looks for https://.
There are also browser extensions to do that and some Browsers like Brave or Firefox (with some config tweaks) can do this without any extensions, but since I don't want to force anyone to install an extension or to enable blocking the referrer by default.
What is a soft ban?
- The removed websites with an insecure protocol are now listed under banned.md, however if the webmaster/owner decides to upgrade the website to a secure and better standard then I'm going to re-list them on the Overview page.
Why are some pages (which are insecure) marked/tagged with `insecure`?
- Some very popular websites are insecure, however they are not been removed for several reasons e.g. popularity, search reasons etc.
Website with "beta" https://?
Some websites can be reached via HTTPS-Everywhere & Co. to "upgrade" (redirect) the website to https://, however if the website does not naively support HTTPS by default then it's considerable a "beta" redirection which is not been tolerated. No one should be forced to use extensions/scripts/filters to reach a secure website. Welcome to 2019.
Minimum website standard?
TLS 2.0+. According to several stats pages only <5% of all encrypted pages using an outdated TLS version 1.0/1.1/1.2 etc. So welcome in Russia my friends... Just update your standard. It's not hard, if you can't do it then why should we trust your page/content?!
Why does it matter if the website only lists/links to other secure providers e.g. zippyshare (sharehoster) etc.?!
The reason is that Warez pages are been actively monitored and indexed, the risk is high that those pages are somehow compromised (XSS, MITM, etc) in order to find out who is going to click on link x or simply to track you down.
Wrong assumption (?)
I do not support or vouch for any https site here, but in my point of view in 2019 every freak'n page should be at least be in TLS 2.0 (or higher). I doubt every website owner/site or hoster which is not capable of providing a secure website/content, especially if it comes to Warez.
- http, ftp and other insecure protocols (links) to websites or any material is not allowed. All insecure websites (according to the current "standards" getting moved to the "banned.md" overview.
- Do not abuse any GitHub system e.g. pull/issue ticket system to troll (this is now explicit mentioned)
- Do not link to explicit content, this is already disallowed by GitHub's terms of use but I cover it again.
- Impostors or new pages are not allowed, the new pages (mirrors) getting reviewed to ensure no one gets fooled with malware, clickbait, spam or other stuff like that.
- Minor changes (because I like to say at the end "minor change") ...
Don't punish me if I put the Magisk modules under the "scripts" section....
I added a warning because I'm sick of the "use XPrivacyLua to get more app privacy" discussions.
All tools are open source.
Well that's more or less the goal for the entire project here, list only open source & trust stuff without been worried to get infected by some nasty malware. But you never know at the end....
