Firefox "honeymoon" over?

[kuba]

http://www.broadbandreports.com/shownews/67516
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/index.php?p=103

Kinda crappy deal that FF is targeted my malicous users, you'd think they'd wanna screw with IE users ->Microsoft, and let the underdog have a good run

 

[SleepWalkerX]

discussion in OS forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=34&threadid=1690465&enterthread=y

 

[kuba]

thanks didnt do a search (obviously)

 

[Snapster]

They'll screw with what ever is popular no matter who it is. Currently it's MS because they are the biggest. One day people will hate google

 

[jEnus]

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX
discussion in OS forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=34&threadid=1690465&enterthread=y

Firefox is a software, not an OS.

 

[kuba]

Originally posted by: Snapster
They'll screw with what ever is popular no matter who it is. Currently it's MS because they are the biggest. One day people will hate google

very true...im starting on that road myself lol

 

[kuba]

Originally posted by: jEnus

Originally posted by: SleepWalkerX
discussion in OS forum.

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=34&threadid=1690465&enterthread=y

Firefox is a software, not an OS.

yep, that's what i thought, but hey, thread started already, what can you do

 

[mechBgon]

Here's an article that caught my eye at The Register on the same topic:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/19/symantec_threat_report/

Graham Pinkney, head of threat intelligence EMEA at Symantec, said that switching from IE to Firefox as a way of minimising security risks was no longer valid advice. "Cross-site scripting attacks have been used to attack more vulnerabilities in Mozilla browsers over the last six months than IE," Pinkney told an IDC security conference last week ahead of the publication of Symantec's threat report today. John Cheney, chief executive of email filtering firm BlackSpider, replied that the release of Firefox had "helped Microsoft to raise its game" in terms of browser security.

Browsers are best run under non-Admin credentials, no matter which ones you're using.

 

[kuba]

im guessing mozilla really has to ante up their game now, since MS has ie7 comin out...itll make things interesting...Mech, when you say, under non admin credentials, elaborate...i'm thinking as the "user" of the computer...but correct me if i'm wrong...thanks....

 

[manly]

Don't worry about divorce papers unless they add ActiveX to Firefox default it to on.

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: kuba
im guessing mozilla really has to ante up their game now, since MS has ie7 comin out...itll make things interesting...Mech, when you say, under non admin credentials, elaborate...i'm thinking as the "user" of the computer...but correct me if i'm wrong...thanks....

In a stand-alone WindowsXP computer, there are two classes of user accounts: Computer Administrator, and Limited. I wrote a page explaining the benefits of a Limited account because it's got so much potential for preventing malware from attacking you via your Web browsers, email program or instant-messaging program. Like a seatbelt keeps you safely inside the body of your car in a collision, a Limited account has inherent boundaries of what it can do, whether it's under your control or has gotten subverted by an exploit/virus/etc.

Limited accounts are especially nice if your computer is going to get borrowed by a roommate, girlfriend, parent, sibling, employee, etc. They can't do much harm if they can't get onto your Admin-class accounts, which is where password protection and setting the screensaver to show the Welcome screen at resume is what you want.

I use a Limited account for daily-driver usage on my work and home systems, and I'm the only user of either one. It's just a good practice.

 

[Seeruk]

The exact same thing will happen if Linux ever gets mainstream numbers. They will be a bigger target and all the smug zealots will be like OMFG it must be Gates himself haxx0ring me!!!!

 

[chcarnage]

Another attempt of an Anti Virus Company to create new markets. The TheReg article sums it up nicely although there's no written conclusion. Mac OS X is in danger, too, says Symantec, but all their entries in the OS X virus library are hoaxes so far... I don't say it will stay like this forever, but as I explained here, for now this are rather artificial attempts to raise fear in OS X users and I bet the situation is similar in the Firefox case... FF isn't invulnerable, but it's patched regularly and based on different design decisions (can you say "OS integration").

Originally posted by: kuba
im guessing mozilla really has to ante up their game now, since MS has ie7 comin out...itll make things interesting...Mech, when you say, under non admin credentials, elaborate...i'm thinking as the "user" of the computer...but correct me if i'm wrong...thanks....

I've stopped to compare available products to future Microsoft products long time ago.

 

[blurredvision]

YES! Finally, what I've always argued here with people who kept saying FF was more secure than IE, is that IE is targeted more because it's the most used. I love this, and I hope people give FF hell over the next few months.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: kuba
Kinda crappy deal that FF is targeted my malicous users, you'd think they'd wanna screw with IE users ->Microsoft, and let the underdog have a good run

Actually, I don't like the idea of the software I use being full of holes that just sit there because nobody's trying to find them. Getting hit hard is absolutely what any open source project needs, otherwise claims of better security are just marketing crap. If it gets so bad that people stop using firefox in droves then it didn't deserve to be used anyways. At the moment, it's still my opinion that firefox has the best feature set and community so I'll keep using it.

And I agree with blurredvision, this trend has been pretty obvious over the last few months. It's just that someone wrote a visible and somewhat controversial blog and now everybody likes to get excited about it.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: blurredvision
YES! Finally, what I've always argued here with people who kept saying FF was more secure than IE, is that IE is targeted more because it's the most used. I love this, and I hope people give FF hell over the next few months.

joy in the misery of others?
we have a word for that, you know...
anyway: what is more likely to happen is
1. FF will hit a peak of mainstream users.
2. FF will begin to get attacked more.
3. FF users that were uncomfortable with change and wanted to use IE will go back to IE
4. FF use will drop to its initial numbers + a small % more
5. IE will be #1 and crappy, FF will be #2 or 3 and good.

 

[Nothinman]

The exact same thing will happen if Linux ever gets mainstream numbers. They will be a bigger target and all the smug zealots will be like OMFG it must be Gates himself haxx0ring me!!!!

Not really, the biggest security problem in any case is users, us zealots will be fine. Linux has better default security settings so it'll be a lot harder for a worm to take over the entire system, but if the user is going to download things and run them as admin/root without question the battle is already lost.

YES! Finally, what I've always argued here with people who kept saying FF was more secure than IE, is that IE is targeted more because it's the most used. I love this, and I hope people give FF hell over the next few months.

Yea, because that's a very productive thing to do.

 

[mechBgon]

but if the user is going to download things and run them as admin/root without question the battle is already lost.

Hear, hear :thumbsup:

http://www.viruslist.com/en/weblog This caught my eye...

Korean distributives for mozilla and thunderbird for linux turned out to be infected - mozilla-installer-bin from mozilla-1.7.6.ko-KR.linux-i686.installer.tar.gz and mozilla-xremote-client from thunderbird-1.0.2.tar.gz were infected with Virus.Linux.RST.b

D'oh!

 

[kuba]

Originally posted by: mechBgon

Originally posted by: kuba
im guessing mozilla really has to ante up their game now, since MS has ie7 comin out...itll make things interesting...Mech, when you say, under non admin credentials, elaborate...i'm thinking as the "user" of the computer...but correct me if i'm wrong...thanks....

In a stand-alone WindowsXP computer, there are two classes of user accounts: Computer Administrator, and Limited. I wrote a page explaining the benefits of a Limited account because it's got so much potential for preventing malware from attacking you via your Web browsers, email program or instant-messaging program. Like a seatbelt keeps you safely inside the body of your car in a collision, a Limited account has inherent boundaries of what it can do, whether it's under your control or has gotten subverted by an exploit/virus/etc.

Limited accounts are especially nice if your computer is going to get borrowed by a roommate, girlfriend, parent, sibling, employee, etc. They can't do much harm if they can't get onto your Admin-class accounts, which is where password protection and setting the screensaver to show the Welcome screen at resume is what you want.

I use a Limited account for daily-driver usage on my work and home systems, and I'm the only user of either one. It's just a good practice.

perfect thanks...good to know, will read your page explaining the benefits later today