That depends on how @joshuef and @PaulFrazee decide to fork/not fork the project. I’m fine with both decisions, if they choose to work under the name Beaker that would be cool as well. In that case I would vote for:
SAFE Beaker
The SAFE Beaker browser is the most secure entrance to websites on The SAFE Network.
How does that sound? 
I love it. I second that.
I third that motion 
I like this intro a lot…but IMO its a bit wordy. I hope you dont mind a suggestion.
SAFE Beaker Browser. Secure access to everything on The SAFE Network.
Im assuming “Beaker” needs to be there, if not drop it.
SAFE Browser. Secure access to everything on The SAFE Network.
Other ideas
SAFE Beaker Browser. Secure your access to everything on The SAFE Network.
Think Secure. Think SAFE. The SAFE Beaker Browser secures your access to everything on The SAFE Network.
EDIT: had “the” in there, Bad grammar.
Haha, nope. I’m just putting my 2 cents out here.
SAFE Beaker Browser. Secure acces to websites and web apps on The SAFE Network
“SAFE Beaker Browser” sounds good to me
So Im thinking “everything” encompasses more than “websites and web apps” ??
Yes, but it implies wallets and coins as well, and a messenger. And we don’t have an idea if the apps for that will be in a browser or not.
good point,
Seems to me that if it’s not a fork, then we are using beaker with a SAFE plugin … so not a “SAFE Beaker Browser” at all.
What are the security implications of a fork versus not a fork?
IMO, it would seem that the browser would still be able to access the clearnet which by itself is a no-go for security. Plus what happens if beaker browser adds/deletes/changes some functionality that impacts security? Sure it could be forked later … but that would cause some disruption to people already using it.
IMO, seems better to me to fork it now. Do whatever is needed to keep Paul happy, but don’t compromise security - this is what SAFEnet represents to the world - no compromise on security.
Yes, but you can still incorporate updates from the mainline with a fork. There is little benefit from not forking … Again - [quote=“TylerAbeoJordan, post:294, topic:10336”]
it would seem that the browser would still be able to access the clearnet which by itself is a no-go for security
[/quote]
IMO we need a solution that completely blocks access to the clearnet. Perhaps this plugin can do that, I don’t know, but IMO it’s mandatory if we are going to claim it’s a secure solution.
@TylerAbeoJordan, @PaulFrazee will provide seprate packages for the SAFE Beaker Browser that will block out clear net. Don’t think of SAFE Beaker as a fork of the Beaker Browser, but instead it will be a different flavor of Classic Beaker.
Edit: we will also get two developers for the price of one. One of whom is the original developer of the Beaker.
The plugin will be used as it’s intended within Beaker, which is only in scope of protocol and api injection.
There are other functionalities needed as described in the proposal, yep.
Extra functionality may result in a fork. But the ideal would be not to fork if we can avoid, so we’re investigating how best to go about this, and what makes sense for beaker and @PaulFrazee.
Yeah, @whiteoutmashups, @Pierce “Secure Access For Everyone except those that use the plugin we made for an unapologetically insecure spy browser.” has a pretty clear message that implies freedom of choice, but makes it obvious what the best choice is. Might be a good marketing ploy.
Evening alllll.
Just before I nip to bed, I thought yous might appreciate this link: Release Build tests. Version 1. · joshuef/beaker · GitHub
Which is a test of an app package of the POC, so safe: links should work, and all you hopefully have to do on OSX is download the DMG and install like a normal app.
Linux and Windows have packaged apps as well. These are not tested and are bult on OSX so YMMV, but I’d be interested to know of any success or errors that anyone might find.
It’s important to note, these builds are not SAFE. They should access the network without a proxy, buttt, they are still clearnet enabled, so anonymity is not guaranteed (as demonstrated by this banana ).
My aim is to get the build process straightened out ASAP, so let me know how you get on. Bur right now I’m off to bed 
. It’s late. But I’ll be about for support and to work some more on this tomorrow.
Guten nacht!
Here is the error that is sent out on windows during installation :
Clicking ok terminates the process. Hope this helps.
Windows 8, 8.1, or 10?