IE Blows Away Rivals in Browser Security

PC Mag ^ | 14 Dec 2010 | Tony Bradley

[antiRepublicrat]

Do you have a link to that charge?

Are you that naive? This isn't the first time a software company funded a review that was favorable to itself. It certainly wouldn't be a first for Microsoft.

[antiRepublicrat]

BTW, here.

The security-products testing lab recently released a Web browser security test report which was an in-depth comparison of specific security capabilities in several browsers, including Microsoft Internet Explorer 8, Chrome and Safari, and did acknowledge that Microsoft, whose browser performed the best, funded the security evaluation.

[Marine_Uncle]

"And no one has challeged you on that....wonder why? "
Perhaps because it is true.

[Marine_Uncle]

"As soon as a user connects the machine to the network it's now fundamentally unsecureable.
To a degree your statement is reasonable. But a OPS is only as secure as it's designer's attempt to make it.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I updated to M-7 and also IE-8, this thing is down right bullet proof. I have never before, had such a solid feeling of security since. Add to that, Microsoft's extremely good and free, virus program and firewall, (Security Essentials) you have the most secure and compatible system known to the industry.

I found myself unable to enjoy using a computer when using a system which spent most of its time trying to ward off threats, and demanding that I pay attention to security. When I found that I had fallen for a social-engineering attack which was predicated on conning me into taking action precisely to protect my computer, that was pretty much the last straw.

The Apple-bots will all cringe and gnash their teeth when they hear it

and mostly, we'll laugh. Because we're free, and have been since we switched away from Windows.

Apparently Win7 is actually pretty good, by the reports I've seen. I certainly HOPE so, after all the hassle you've been through until now! And by hassle, I mean the effort to run virus scan software - let alone responding to a successful attack . . .

Social engineering attack possibilities pretty much inhere in the flexibility which computers give users. Heck, a Nigerian e-mail scam is a social engineering attack. But virus attacks should be as difficult on all computers as history indicates that they are on Unix and Linux ones. Botnets affect everyone on the web . . .

[for-q-clinton]

Are you that naive? This isn't the first time a software company funded a review that was favorable to itself. It certainly wouldn't be a first for Microsoft.

So you're saying Microsoft paid for this review. I'm not saying they did or didn't, but without proof why would you assume they did. If that's the case we can just dismiss any news that we want to dismiss because we can just assume away the facts.

[for-q-clinton]

got it. Thanks for pointing that out.

[for-q-clinton]

Hey wait...that link is to an article from 2009! It’s not current and doesn’t not deal with the current article on PC World.

I’m asking if you know for a fact Microsoft paid for this review? They may have, but we can’t assume that. Who knows Google may have paid for it and was disappointed with the results. I know it’s unlikely but you know what happens when you assume.

[antiRepublicrat]

From the report PDF:

“This private test was contracted by Microsoft’s SmartScreen product team as an internal benchmark, leveraging our Live Testing framework.”

http://www.nsslabs.com/assets/noreg-reports/NSS%20Labs_Q32010_Browser-SEM.pdf

My response to you was because you seemed kind of taken aback at the claim that Microsoft could have paid for this test, when in fact it is a common industry practice.

[for-q-clinton]

I know it’s common practice, but it’s just rumors until someone can prove that it was in fact paid for by Microsoft. Just trying to keep it clear on what the facts are and what the rumors are.

[KateUTWS]

May I suggest a Firefox addon called Memory Fox. I have used it for nearly a year and it takes care of excess memory issues. The addon shows up in my event log every time it fires off but other than that I never know it’s doing it’s job. It’s in Task Manager as “afom” and you can watch the Firefox memory drop.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/53880/

[antiRepublicrat]

You know what the facts are now. But then it’s admitted openly in the survey, and the methods are published, so there’s no conspiracy.

[rsflynn]

Imagine that, originally I speculated, but based on past benchmarks that made Microsoft press releases I figured that this was a good educated guess. Low and behold, you prove me right. Another “independent evaluation” funded by Microsoft. Gotta make you wonder.

As an aside, if Microsoft were such a good corporate citizen, they would make sure all these browser upgrades were compatible with their older OS’s, like XP, 2000, etc.

[longtermmemmory]

reminds me of the old graphic card bench mark tests when on maker was caught hard wiring the tests into the card to speed the card up. (see also intoxilizer breathalizer which had its calibration test hardwired to always give a “chamber empty” result)

[antiRepublicrat]

Some of these breathalyzers and other such hardware are some of the worst examples of computing ever. A while back a guy finally won in court to have their code reviewed and it was apparently a horrible mess. I can’t believe we’re sending people to jail based on these.

[rdb3]

As for browsers, you forget the Microsoft exec saying "We are going to cut off Netscape's air supply."

Yep, and I liked Netscape a lot.

Runaway Slave

Apostle Claver tells the world how the real party of racism is the Democrats