Cyberfox author proclaims death of web browser - gHacks Tech News

Cyberfox author proclaims death of web browser

Toady, the lead developer of Cyberfox proclaimed the death of the web browser in an article entitled Cyberfox and its future direction.

Cyberfox is a Firefox-based browser that is available as processor-specific builds, in classic and Australis styles. It ships with additional features built-in to the browser, but is compatible mostly with Firefox.

Cyberfox, and other Firefox-based browsers like Pale Moon or Waterfox, came to prominence by offering optimized builds, especially for 64-bit versions of Windows, long before Mozilla started to even offer 64-bit versions officially.

The death of Cyberfox, or more precisely, the announcement of end of life for the web browser may come as a shock to users who run it. It should not be too much of a surprise though for users who keep an eye on the browser world and especially Mozilla and Firefox.

The death of Cyberfox

cyberfox death

Mozilla announced major changes to Firefox, some of which landed already, some are in process, and others are announced for 2017.

You can read our state of Mozilla Firefox article for an overview. Only this much: multi-process Firefox is almost done, plugins are out except for Flash and Firefox ESR, Windows XP and Vista users are switched to Firefox ESR so that the operating systems are supported for eight additional releases, and WebExtensions will replace all other add-on systems of the browser.

That's a lot of change, especially for projects that are maintained by a small but dedicated group of developers such as Cyberfox.

Reasons given by the lead developer fall right into this:

Over the years the Cyberfox project has grown immensely and its thanks to all the amazing support of our users and has been an amazing couple of years this however has demanded far more of my time causing me to drop allot of projects and passions id like to pursue,the time factor this project has demanded has also take a toll lifestyle wise as have the changes made by Mozilla requiring more and more time to maintain so its come to a point
where i recently had to assess the direction of this project and the direction i wish to head for the future.

The author of Cyberfox made the decision to switch the browser's release channel to Firefox 52.0 ESR. This means that Cyberfox will be supported with security updates for the next eight release cycles, but new features that Mozilla introduces in Firefox Stable won't find their way into the browser anymore.

This is similar to how Firefox ESR handles updates, but with the difference that Firefox ESR users will be updated eventually to a new major build (except for XP and Vista users for whom Firefox 52.x is also the end of the line).

So in short for the next 12 months cyberfox will be on the ESR time line getting security updates at the end of which will likely be the EOL (End of life) now that is a long time and factors may change lifestyle wise that will allow the project to continue after the 12 months but at this stage its (EOL) at the end of the ESR Cycle, now this does not stop anyone from taking the cyberfox source code and re branding it as sadly can't use our name or trademarks and a 3rd party can take over where we left off.

The author mentions that there is still a slim chance that Cyberfox may make a comeback after all, but that it does not seem likely at this point in time.

Now You: What's your take on the death of Cyberfox?

Summary
Article Name
Cyberfox author proclaims death of web browser
Description
Toady, the lead developer of Cyberfox proclaimed the death of the web browser in an article entitled Cyberfox and its future direction.
Author
Publisher
Ghacks Technology News
Logo
Advertisement

We need your help

Advertising revenue is falling fast across the Internet, and independently-run sites like Ghacks are hit hardest by it. The advertising model in its current form is coming to an end, and we have to find other ways to continue operating this site.

We are committed to keeping our content free and independent, which means no paywalls, no sponsored posts, no annoying ad formats or subscription fees.

If you like our content, and would like to help, please consider making a contribution:


Previous Post: «
Next Post: »

Comments

  1. Celestial said on March 7, 2017 at 6:54 pm
    Reply

    It’s sad. I’ve used Cyberfox for a few years now and as my primary browser for two years. It was and is faster than the standard Mozilla Firefox builds, and offered greater customization. It’s understandable though. Cyberfox is primarily a one man operation, and he said that the lack of money and the ever increasing amount of time required supporting it was taking a toll on his health, and health is more important than any browser. I wish him well.

    Now I don’t know if I’ll switch back to Mozilla Firefox or just use Chrome. I mean, Mozilla seems intent on making Firefox a copy of Chrome. May as well just use the real thing.

    1. Alan Robertson said on March 7, 2017 at 9:47 pm
      Reply

      “Now I don’t know if I’ll switch back to Mozilla Firefox or just use Chrome. I mean, Mozilla seems intent on making Firefox a copy of Chrome. May as well just use the real thing.”

      I agree – Mozilla is fast destroying itself. I can’t see many of the developers rewriting their addons as extensions which is the only reason why most people use Firefox in the first place. I figure by the time they get round to FF 57 everybody else will be using Chrome.

      It’s a sad day when you have a choice of Chrome / Chromium / Opera (based on Chromium) / Firefox (using Chromium Extensions – soon to be another Chrome clone) or Safari or Edge. So in less than one years time the market is going to consist of 90% Chrome based browsers…. Oh and Safari and Edge too (like that’s going to make a difference to your choice).

      1. The Flash said on March 7, 2017 at 10:20 pm
        Reply

        I believe Edge is based on Chromium. Safari uses Webkit, which is what the Blink web rendering engine in Chromium is forked from.

      2. bwat47 said on March 7, 2017 at 10:45 pm
        Reply

        Edge is not based on Chromium/Blink, it uses EdgeHTML which is forked from Internet explorer’s trident engine.

        Edge does use chromium’s webextensions architecture for it’s extensions though (like mozilla is planning to).

      3. Lord Lestat said on March 7, 2017 at 11:21 pm
        Reply

        Well there is also Otter-Browser with the revived QTWebkit – not the QTWEbengine from Google.

        A good browser in my opinion.

      4. Andy said on March 8, 2017 at 2:29 am
        Reply

        Edge is note based on Chromium. It’s pretty much just Internet Explorer, with assorted legacy bits stripped out.

      5. Mike said on March 8, 2017 at 3:39 am
        Reply

        As noted by Andy, Edge is not based on Chromium. It has a “new” engine, EdgeHTML, which is primarily based on the Internet Explorer engine, minus a bunch of legacy code and few new bits of a code that make it far more compliant with the modern web.

      6. Zack said on March 8, 2017 at 7:21 am
        Reply

        I have no reason to use Chrome. None of the core reasons for me to use Firefox are gone.

        NoScript, better adblocking, unbeatable privacy, Containers to come, Servo/Quantum, etc, too lazy to make a complete list. I’ll find new reasons to use it and adapt old ones.

        You do what you want but don’t throw other people in your bag as you leave, I have no reason to follow ;)

      7. Alan Robertson said on March 8, 2017 at 2:59 pm
        Reply

        Hi Zack,

        I use NoScript too – it’s a great Addon for preventing malware attacks via JavaScript, it also blocks a lot of obnoxious advertising and it helps to prevent online tracking. Too bad that there isn’t an Extension version of it available when Mozilla drops all the Addons this coming November…. There’s NoScript Lite but it’s not the same.

        What I’m really saying is: This November when Mozilla releases Firefox 57 all Addons will stop working including NoScript and currently there is no Extension version available to take its place. So in effect, NoScript will be removed from your browser whether you like it or not.

        There’s more info here on this:
        https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/02/16/the-road-to-firefox-57-compatibility-milestones/comment-page-1/#comments

      8. www.com said on March 9, 2017 at 9:21 am
        Reply

        I’m with @Zack. You can preach doom & gloom all you want to, but I want to see how this plays out in about a year or so after the XUL / XPCOM addons are dropped.

        No way I’m using Chrome. Vivaldi, Otter or even Edge will come before Chrome.

  2. wonton said on March 7, 2017 at 6:55 pm
    Reply

    Very sad to hear, health issues is what the developer states as the main reason being the largest factor. surprisingly most think cyberfox is made by a group of people when just one guy doing it like waterfox or pale moon was. all the best to him.

    1. Anonymous said on March 8, 2017 at 5:30 am
      Reply

      Pale Moon has a big following now, getting bigger with firefox taking the plunge. The man behind it has at least 5 or 6 others actively contributing and a lot more behind the scenes testing. He has recently decided to port majority of FF backend stuff into his new Goanna engine. Security speaking, it’s almost as tight as FF without the bloat.

      1. Martin Brinkmann said on March 8, 2017 at 5:43 am
        Reply

        I imagine Pale Moon will get a good boost when Cyberfox reaches EOL, and also when Mozilla switches to WebExtensions exclusively.

      2. www.com said on March 9, 2017 at 9:27 am
        Reply

        “I imagine Pale Moon will get a good boost when Cyberfox reaches EOL, and also when Mozilla switches to WebExtensions exclusively.”

        @Martin, I’ll believe that when I see it. – lol…

        Palemoon is an old code fringe browser run by a luddite who has little money and a tiny user base. When those Mozilla add-on webpages disappear, they’re gone. Truly gone.

        So no more piggybacking off of Mozilla, which what they’ve been doing since the beginning.

  3. chad said on March 7, 2017 at 7:41 pm
    Reply

    I have been using Cyberfox as my backup browser to Chrome for a long time, and love it. Let’s have some ideas for a replacement for Cyberfox. How about Pale Moon?

    1. trek100 said on March 7, 2017 at 9:54 pm
      Reply

      Yes, using Pale Moon
      for the last 3 years+.
      I’m happy with it.
      I keep FF as a backup browser…

      There is no perfect browser.

      But…
      all my old FF addons work fine in Pale Moon.

      And PM is faster than FF,
      which has become so bloated and slow.

      Just try it
      and see if you like it:
      http://www.palemoon.org/

  4. Andy T said on March 7, 2017 at 7:48 pm
    Reply

    I have used this browser for a couple of years and liked it better than firefox.
    I wish Toady all the best for the future.

  5. Matt A. Tobin said on March 7, 2017 at 8:55 pm
    Reply

    You know.. it is almost embarrassing to see Pale Moon grouped in with Cyberfox which is a minimally changed Firefox rebuild and Waterfox which serves no purpose ever since 64bit builds of Firefox were released.

    Out of all these and a couple more.. Pale Moon is the only one getting true fork status and has independent and divergent development.

    Of course, If I misunderstood and they are talking about Pale Moon’s past say 5 years ago then ok maybe.

    1. Martin Brinkmann said on March 7, 2017 at 8:59 pm
      Reply

      Matt, this was just a look back in time when all the builds started out. This was not intended to compare the browser’s current state.

      1. Anonymous said on March 7, 2017 at 9:36 pm
        Reply
    2. Dave said on March 8, 2017 at 1:49 am
      Reply

      I think some of us remember when Palemoon became a ‘TRUE, totally independent fork’ of Firefox 24 ESR. Hard to forget because it was so often repeated by the PM devs.

      Mind you, I also remember when the PM dev crawled back to Mozilla in late 2016, with his tail between his legs, at having to rebase PaleMoon on Firefox 38 ESR, i.e. doing the very thing that this ‘completely independent fork’ swore previously never to do.

      We don’t all have the memory spans of goldfish, you know.

      1. Anonymous said on March 8, 2017 at 12:36 pm
        Reply

        45 or 52 esr the next?

      2. Anonymous said on March 20, 2017 at 1:19 am
        Reply

        Actually your memory span must be shorter than that, because that’s not at all what happened. Rebasing on ESR 38 was not something the team took lightly. It was done because it was easier to do so at the time than it would have been to manually reimplement the features since then.

        Plus the community asked for it, and was lobbying for it. They are doing no such thing now for a rebase on ESR 45 or 52, and there would be zero reason to ask for that.

        Pale Moon is a viable choice, and will likely be the ONLY viable choice once Mozilla slits their own throat.

    3. wonton said on March 8, 2017 at 4:41 am
      Reply

      Matthew, it is embarrassing to see this type of attitude this reflect poorly on pale moon as a project and development team. this whole true fork rubbish too. reasons why given up on pale moon long time ago.

  6. Lord Lestat said on March 7, 2017 at 9:02 pm
    Reply

    And again that terrible guys from Mozilla have won a major battle in their quest to destroy XUL, fight customization and to take down other on Firefox code based projects, no matter if that projects want it or not (it will only be a matter of time before Seamonkey and other Gecko based browsers meet a similar fate) thanks to Mozillas changes which makes it impossible for other projects to keep their features.

    Most blame goes towards Mozillas direction – if it would not be for their quest to be more Chrome than Chrome to be the perfect Chrome users dream, nothing of all that would have happened. There would never have been the need for replacements like Cyberfox or Pale Moon and we all still could use a superior browser which is way better than the rest of the competition.

    All what Mozilla does is only leading to help that Google Chrome gets more traction, power and influence.

    A really sad day. And Mozilla should be ashamed for that. Their Google influenced “decisions and future-visions” leads to a loss of quality and the decline of creativity.

    That is beyond shameful!

    1. Zen said on March 8, 2017 at 7:23 am
      Reply

      #BrokenRecord

      1. lord lestat said on March 8, 2017 at 12:00 pm
        Reply

        And yet it is true. Mozilla has discarded the right that people have to act friendly and non-critical towards them.

        If there is something going wrong, it should be shouted out loud and clear. Sure, Mozilla does not care, they are happy about their similarities with Google Chrome. Perhaps they really get the amount of Chrome users of their dreams.

        But still, they are respect-less, dishonest and corrupted corporate business guys who think only with their purse and not with their brain. Mozilla is like generation snowflake on the search for safe space. But who is a big sell-out has to take the beating which awaits them into the woods.

        Morons should be called the way they are. And Mozilla are a bunch of morons. Not the old Mozilla which should be respected. But that new bunch of corporate business guys who dream to be Chrome 2 and do everything in their might to make that dream come true.

        Such morons earn neither respect or love or protection. This is what they earn. To be called out!

        And the worst of it? They are absolute cowards who refuse to have a discussion with power and advanced users. Because they know they will lose such a discussion. Which leads them to censor critical opinions both on their support pages and on IRC!

        I have spent enough time on both resources and have seen countless of people who not have been humiliating at all being silenced for zero reason just because they dared to question Mozilla’s Chrome similar decisions!

      2. www.com said on March 9, 2017 at 9:34 am
        Reply

        @lord lestat, and yet you’re still a broken record. I don’t like Google anymore than you do, but the change is gonna come whether you or I like it or not

        Go switch to Chrome or Palemoon and move on. (yawn…)

      3. lord lestat said on March 9, 2017 at 12:47 pm
        Reply

        I will not stop. Only because Mozilla becoming almost Chrome does not mean that you are not allowed to try to make others realize that Mozilla is a corrupted company and the developers are plain and simple assholes.

        Who betrays power users that way should not be ignored at all and earns to be not forgotten. Especially if the organization in charge is abusing the concept of Open Source. And abusing Open Source is a not forgivable crime.

        Mozilla should stop call themselves Open Source, because Open Source projects are making wise and intelligent decisions and are caring for their own users without replacing them for other users because they suddenly become too greedy.

        It is important to try to fight injustice with whole heart and soul. Especially if the enemy hides behind a benevolent mask.

        Mozilla is disgusting and that alone is worthy to bring into the public.

      4. www.com said on March 10, 2017 at 6:27 am
        Reply

        @lord lestat = #BrokenRecord

        (yawn) zzzzz….zzzzz….

      5. lord lestat said on March 10, 2017 at 10:09 am
        Reply

        As there is no other Open Source project with such a lack of respect fairness it is the duty of every defender of rightousness and honesty to stand in the way of those who oppose the mentioned virtues.

        And there is only one correct way to act. Keeping the flame of resistance burning and standing in the way of the mortal enemies of the open and free web. And that are Google and
        their butt-kisser called Mozilla. Firefox and it’s developerteam have no right to exist. They earn to be obliterated and removed out of the business.

  7. ARM9 said on March 8, 2017 at 12:30 am
    Reply

    This just makes me even more glad that I switched to Pale Moon when I did!

  8. Dan said on March 8, 2017 at 1:11 am
    Reply

    Well, time to go back to Vivaldi. I am having problems loading Ghacks on Vivaldi for some reason (using Opera right now). I may install Firefox to replace Cyberfox. I need at least one Gecko-powered browser for the odd site.

    1. Anonymous said on March 10, 2017 at 2:37 pm
      Reply

      I’m on Opera too :) Vivaldi is kinda heavy for my current machine though. I thought about giving a lowly old webkit browser a try again.

  9. ChromeFox Doomsday said on March 8, 2017 at 2:43 am
    Reply

    Not really suprised, WaterFox may follow suite aswell as SeaMonkey since 52 is the final ESR with XUL/Gecko Engine…

  10. pd said on March 8, 2017 at 9:41 am
    Reply

    A surprise? Anything but. The browser looked interesting but it was obvious it wasn’t likely to be an ongoing entity. The only surprise is how Pale Moon and the like keep going.

    What *would* be great to see is new bowser devs taking early advantage of Servo, WebRender and Rust. Mozilla has the burden of integrating those promising components into the mass of code that is the existing Firefox. New players could probably grab those components and build a new codebase around it.

    Instead of trying to ‘ambulance chase’ sick Firefox users, why not build a genuine competitor by leveraging a free, strong-performing codebase to build a browser free of legacy code?

    1. wonton said on March 8, 2017 at 12:58 pm
      Reply

      @pd only 5 years with 2018 making 6 with a chance of still continuing the only surprise here is health issues killing a great project. turns out toady funded the project from his disability payments so clearly ongoing health issues to start with for what toady did should be applauded.

  11. Lexx_Blackstone said on March 8, 2017 at 5:49 pm
    Reply

    Time to move on and try something else but what?, I did think of trying Lunascape.

  12. Herman Sherman said on March 8, 2017 at 8:05 pm
    Reply

    Hi, Martin —

    re: “plugins are out expect for Flash and Firefox ESR,”

    I think you mean “plugins are out except for Flash and Firefox ESR,” [replacing “expect” with “except”]

  13. Mike J. said on March 9, 2017 at 12:21 am
    Reply

    Actually, I have found Waterfox to be a better browser than Cyberfox, my principal browser, over the past few months,

  14. Midori said on March 9, 2017 at 11:10 am
    Reply

    I’m using GNU IceCat for quite some time, and so far it’s the best FF fork i’ve found, so i’d switch to it from CyberFox

  15. Jack Yan said on March 9, 2017 at 10:37 pm
    Reply

    It’s a shame. The support for Cyberfox was great, and it wasn’t a memory hog on my system. Waterfox, for some reason, ate up my RAM more quickly (though I used Waterfox for years before I discovered Cyberfox), and Pale Moon has diverged a bit too much given the way I browse. Might have to go with the official Firefox 64-bit now, although it eats my RAM, too—just not as quickly as Waterfox. I’d love to hear of alternatives which can import my Firefox profile and works with Sync, but searches keep taking me back to Waterfox.

  16. Haakon said on March 12, 2017 at 8:07 pm
    Reply

    ESR is A-OK with me.

    If CF goes EOL, at least it’ll be a year or so when to decide on something else. By then, no doubt, there’ll be community consensus on what to consider.

    Though there might be nothing 64-bit and specifically compiled for Intel or AMD procs to choose from. And portable if desired. Sigh.

    Nothing else runs as fast and as stable on my Win7 i7 system.

  17. Darkflame said on June 20, 2017 at 9:16 pm
    Reply

    Damn, understandable but shit, i’ve used Cyberfox as my main browser for 4 years now, it will be missed!

    We’re slowly heading back to a one horse browser race but with Chrome being what IE was 15 years ago, even the competition is just clones of it.

  18. Kerby said on July 2, 2017 at 7:06 pm
    Reply

    Why is everybody so shocked by Firefox’s future direction. It’s so simple to figure out I am suprised that it has not been mentioned here by people with a hell of alot more insider knowledge than me. Duhhhhhhhh……Mozilla nowaday’s owes its existence to Yahoo……..and we know how well that company is run. Now Verizon will be their new masters and the browser mechanics look like they are heading to Smart Phone City. Think about it!!!

  19. Boris Baran said on July 11, 2017 at 12:52 am
    Reply

    OK, given that Cyberfox is dead and Mozilla will be killing the extensions, which was the only reason I even use Firefox, what is left? Pale Moon, Waterfox or something else?

  20. keystoneclimber said on August 24, 2017 at 4:30 pm
    Reply

    Very sad indeed. I love Cyberfox. I love the user configuration and customization options. I love the gorgeous traditional non-Australis interface. Mozilla and Google… show me my file menu and put the d*mn tabs beneath the location bar!!! (no I don’t care that you can save me 1/4″ of screen real estate) I love the ability to skin with a true dark UI including the location text box. (without having to change my entire windows theme) I love about:config. I love that I can set extensions.stylish.dbFile = D:\Cloud\GoogleDrive\.

    After everything that I love, there is one thing that drives me mad… scrolling hesitation. It’s rampant in Cyberfox. My scroll wheel should NEVER hesitate page scrolling. It’s a memory and page load speed issue and doesn’t happen on Chrome. (yes I’ve tried it in safe mode with all extensions disabled) Maybe the new Firefox core re-design will be a good thing? Maybe not consuming 3GB of RAM to parse a dozen or so pages of HTML and Javascript is a step in the right direction?!?

  21. BJORN said on September 1, 2017 at 8:13 pm
    Reply

    I have used Cyberfox since version 19.0.2
    I liked and loved 19.0.2 till 50.0.0
    Than the newer update brought issues with using too much RAM, unresponding, etc that I start hating Cyberfox.
    I have explained my issues with Toady, but Toady always blames other software instead of looking deeper into his code of Cyberfox.

    Story : Cyberfox is a 64bit of Firefox. I have used Firefox before because I was using Windows XP, than I updated to Windows 7 64bit, so I needed a 64bit browser. Waterfox early versions where fast and stable but after using it for more than 2 years, it started to become sluggish and using too much RAM. So I switched to Cyberfox. In the beginning, with the same hardware and software (!) Cyberfox was fast and stable. Now after updating to version 52.3.0 it’s again sluggish, using up to 6GB RAM with only 5 tabs open, going to any website, typing a comment on any forum, results in nothing appearing, but after 10 seconds or sometimes more, without typing on my keyboard, the things I typed before (10 seconds ago or even more), all magically appear on my screen like someone else is typing!

    I will either downgrade back to Cyberfox 19.0.2 (which is kinda stupid as it contains a lot of bugs which are solved in 20.0.0 but 20.0.0 contains bugs that are solved in 21.0.0 and so on to up to 52.3.0

    So using the latest version still contains bugs even though, it fixes every bug that appeared in every older version. So which version do I need to use? LOL!

    Avoid Waterfox. Avoid Cyberfox. Either use Palemoon, but the latest version has the same sluggish than Waterfox and Cyberfox. The very first version of Palemoon was also fast and stable, just like Waterfox and Cyberfox..

    So it’s kinda fast and stable in the first version but every bug, got fixed in the next version, resulting in less stable browser experience

    At the other hand, Firefox have magically becomes fast and stable again even if it was sluggish and unstable a few versions ago.

    I have used Chrome (not the latest version), Netscape (for fun), Advanced Browser (testing purpose), IE (all versions), Firefox (all versions), Waterfox (early versions until it got sluggish and around 6GB RAM using), Cyberfox (early versions until it got slugglish and around 6GB RAM using), Palemoon (early versions until it got sluggish and around 6GB RAM using), and some other browser which name I forgot.

    Maybe it’s time to buy me a brand new computer with a 8-core, GTX 1080ti, 32GB DDR4 and even more TB’s for SSD and retest this all because some 64bit browsers uses a lot of RAM and CPU cycles!!!

    (Windows 7 64bit Ultimate 16GB DDR4 RAM 1TB SSD)

    1. Dev said on October 20, 2018 at 3:36 pm
      Reply

      RAM issue in Cyberfox and any Gecko’s current mainline based browsers, is because of Firefox’s mulch-architecture memory management (ported from 64-bit project). If you wanna blame someone, go complain to Mozilla and on their Bugzilla tracker.

      1. Bjorn said on October 20, 2018 at 5:43 pm
        Reply

        Ported you say? Which means that a port is not 100% compatible with the operating system or after tens of updates. If you update your software that you made, the “port” version should also be updated to have less bugs in the overall experience.

        I have played many pc games that are ported from other devices (playstation, xbox,…) and afterwards I replayed the same game on the playstation and every issue I had with the ported version on the pc was not on the playstation. On fora, people suggested me to play the game on the platform it was designed for!

        So that means, I have to use the original software that is made specific for the correct device to have the fully 100% experience that Cyberfox was made on. So that means Cyberfox 32bit.
        Wasn’t there an issue that a 32bit program had trouble with memory management on a 64bit operating system? Or am I going crazy now? :-(

        I’m currently using Firefox Quantum, latest version on my Windows 10 64bit computer, and so far, only the battery draining is true.

        Mozilla should create / make better software. Or do they want us to use Edge of Chrome?

  22. Robert G. said on January 20, 2018 at 2:13 pm
    Reply

    @ Martin

    Good news, Cyberfox 52.6.0 is out, the first one in 2018.

    Robert G.
    Fan of ghacks.net

Leave a Reply

Check the box to consent to your data being stored in line with the guidelines set out in our privacy policy

Please note that your comment may not appear immediately after you post it.