Miscellaneous > Applications
Firefox myths
piratePenguin:
--- Quote from: Secunia ---Mozilla Firefox 1.x with all vendor patches installed and all vendor workarounds applied, is currently affected by one or more Secunia advisories rated Less critical
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.x with all vendor patches installed and all vendor workarounds applied, is currently affected by one or more Secunia advisories rated Moderately critical
--- End quote ---
What a surprise!
Lead Head:
I've ran firfox on a 200Mhz Pentium running windows XP with 64MB of ram. It ran pretty damn well considering the outrageous specs of the machine.
EDIT: Ive run firefox on a 133Mhz Pentium running Win98 with 32MB of ram, even then it still ran better then IE on the 233Mhz Pentium running XP
Canadian Lover:
If IE is as safe as Firefox, why can I do this in IE?
(code actually loads onto the page, here's the link: http://www.openopen.org/old/ie/open-cd-ie.html)
Lead Head:
--- Quote from: Canadian Lover ---If IE is as safe as Firefox, why can I do this in IE?
--- End quote ---
Theres no image
Aloone_Jonez:
Mastertech,
Right, you've got me agree on a couple of things, but don't worry it illustrates my point perfectly as you'll see.
--- Quote from: Mastertech ---That doesn't make sense. If you hate misinformation you would love Firefox Myths since is corrects vast amounts of it.
--- End quote ---
Your artical doesn't provide all the facts and thus doesn't allow the reader to make an informed decision about their choice of browser.
--- Quote ---Irrelevant. The point is clearly how ActiveX works. Phishing style attacks do not change the security aspects of ActiveX. People all over spread BS that with ActiveX running you just simply get spyware autoinstalling ect... Simply untrue. Autoinstalling spyware is due to exploits that you failed to patch. It has nothing to do with the security design of ActiveX. IE vulnerabilities are largely exploited using code written in ActiveX this in no way makes ActiveX the cause of the problem. It is just like blaming C++ because a virus author uses it to write his virus.
--- End quote ---
The I suggest you read the US CERT article again.
--- Quote from: US CERTDisable Active scripting and ActiveX
Disabling Active scripting and ActiveX controls in the Internet Zone (or any zone used by an attacker) appears to prevent exploitation of this vulnerability. Disabling Active scripting and ActiveX controls in the Local Machine Zone will prevent widely used payload delivery techniques from functioning. Instructions for disabling Active scripting in the Internet Zone can be found in Securing Your Web Browser and the Malicious Web Scripts FAQ. See Microsoft Knowledge Base Article 833633 for information about securing the Local Machine Zone, and 315933 for information about displaying the Local Machine Zone (My Computer security zone) on the Security tab in the Internet Options dialog box.[/quote ---
--- Quote from: US CERT ---Service Pack 2 for Windows XP disables Active scripting and ActiveX controls for IE and several other programs using Local Machine Zone Lockdown.
--- End quote ---
But that doesn't stop it becoming re-enabled.
--- Quote ---Neither Firefox nor IE are secure as of this writing. Opera currently is with no unpatched vulnerabilities.
--- End quote ---
Correct.
--- Quote ---Currently Firefox has slightly less total vulnerabilities than IE
--- End quote ---
Well that's an understatement.
--- Quote ---but this is changing rapidly has more and more Firefox vulnerabilities are discovered.
--- End quote ---
As they are they're being fixed, and so are the IE vunerabilities.
Not only that but Firefox's vulnerabilities being discovered at a similar rate as IE's.
http://www.webdevout.net/security_summary.php#graphs_total
--- Quote ---All of which is irrelevant to the Firefox Myths page. Why are you bringing up irrelevant things? The Myth being debunked is that Firefox is Secure.
--- End quote ---
Of course it's rellevant, you're debunking myths about Firefox right?
Firefox is a web browser so why is it not rellevant to compare it to another web browser like Opera? You've already compared it to Internet Explorer.
You need to make sure your readers understand that security is relative, and it's a fact that Internet Explorer is insecure relative to Firefox which is insecure relative to Opera.
--- Quote --- It isn't. Making excuses for this does not change this fact.
--- End quote ---
I'm not making any excuses - I'm merely filling in the gaps.
--- Quote ---I really don't care this has nothing to do with the Firefox Myths page.
--- End quote ---
Yes does.
--- Quote ---Microsoft is VERY clear about it's minimum requirements. IE will run on them as I have tested it to work fine. Have you? Everyone making these claims never tested anything. I've been building PCs since the 80s. Windows XP's requirements are stated clearly that 64 MB will limit features and performance and thus mentions 128MB as the recommended minimum, which is what I also clearly recommend. Your lack of understanding and obvious complete lack of testing is the real misinformation here. Minimum requirements are just that, the minimum of which the software application will run. Misinformation is NOT telling them this. Mozilla clearly set the minimum requirements were they were most likely due to Firefox being unusable below those. I can confirm 100% that IE will run on the minimum requirements listed. If you have a problem with Firefox's then bring it up with them I simply report the facts.
--- End quote ---
Have you ever tested Firefox on hardware lower than the minimum requirements? If so you'll find that it actually works, these are recommended minimum requirements not absolute minimum requirements like MS states for it's products.
What you've stated is true, Microsoft's minimum requirements are just that minimum requirements but some other software vendors bais their minimum requirements to is required to give reasonable performance.
--- Quote ---If counting the number of vulnerabilities is "playing with the numbers" then please tell me how. This is the reality. If you cannot grasp the fact that an advisory is released with a variable amount of vulnerabilities I cannot help you.
--- End quote ---
And you can't understand the fact that Firefox is more secure than Microsoft Internet Explorer.
Wait a second, even US CERT recommends you should use a diffenent browser!
--- Quote from: US CERT ---Use a different web browser
There are a number of significant vulnerabilities in technologies related to the IE domain/zone security model, trust in and access to the local file system (Local Machine Zone), the Dynamic HTML (DHTML) document object model (in particular, proprietary DHTML features), the HTML Help system, MIME type determination, the graphical user interface (GUI), and ActiveX. These technologies are implemented as operating system components that are used by IE and many other programs to provide web browser functionality. These components are integrated into Windows to such an extent that vulnerabilities in IE frequently provide an attacker significant access to the operating system.
It is possible to reduce exposure to these vulnerabilities by using a different web browser, especially when viewing untrusted HTML documents (e.g., web sites, HTML email messages). Such a decision may, however, reduce the functionality of sites that require IE-specific features such as proprietary DHTML, VBScript, and ActiveX. Note that using a different web browser will not remove IE from a Windows system, and other programs may invoke IE, the WebBrowser ActiveX control (WebOC), or the HTML rendering engine (MSHTML).
--- End quote ---
--- Quote ---No and irrelevant.
--- End quote ---
Of course it is and it's exactly why your page totally blows. You can't discuss page rendering and compatability without mentioning standards support which very important.
--- Quote ---"Internet Explorer 6.x is clearly faster than Firefox 1.x in 6 out of 7 measures of performance and is significantly faster from a cold start."
--- End quote ---
[list=1]
[*]Apart from the start-up speed the other differences are neglidgable.
[*]These tests don't feature web pages containing a variety of content i.e. each test just looks a one type of content.
[*] Not in my experiance, for example Firefox renders hotmail faster than IE, Firefox renders this forum faster than IE.
[*]It doesn't even mention download speed.
[/list]
--- Quote ---The argument that components of Internet Explorer may load during Windows Startup is nullified by Opera's start times. Which means there is no excuse for this except poor coding on Firefox's part.[/SIZE][/b]
--- End quote ---
Wow, I agree.
Hang on, IE must really be shit then, if it's already loaded when Windows starts, yet Opera actually starts faster!
Well you've proved to me that IE is actually worse than I thought it was before I read your post!
--- Quote ---Who frickin cares!! There is no Myth that IE passes it or passes it well.
--- End quote ---
So what?
You quite rightly raise the point that Firefox doesn't pass the Acid2 test, well done! But wouldn't it be more fair to compare it to IE as well as Opera?
Wouldn't that be providing the reader with more relevant information so they can make a more informed choice?
It's one of those relative things again, something you don't seem to understand.
--- Quote --- STOP making excuses.
--- End quote ---
I'm not making any excuses.
--- Quote ---IE is by FAR compatible with more sites. This is indisputable.
--- End quote ---
But you're neglecting the all important standards debate again - something very important if you want your reader to become more educated.
--- Quote ---It is not that simple anymore. Software is getting more complex and people are not going to sacrifice ease of use for security.
--- End quote ---
Bullshit, Mac OS is both easy to use and secure, ease of use and security can go hand in hand but obviously Microsoft has lead you to believe otherwise, I pitty you.
--- Quote ---MS Office is hands down the better product. However it is very expensive and generally unnecessary for the home user.
--- End quote ---
I generally agree.
--- Quote ---Businesses who rely on Excel or Access will and should continue to use MS Office.
--- End quote ---
On the contrary, bussinesses should continiously evaluate different products and use the one that suits them best - they might be able to make considerable savings.
--- Quote ---MS Works never impressed me and I find Open Office a better solution. Open Office is recommended because I found it to be the best free (as in money) Office Solution.
--- End quote ---
I agree, and if you have money to spare there's always other alternatives like Star Office and Corel Office.
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version