Posted on 09/17/2004 4:02:07 PM PDT by Stoat
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
Mozilla blocks popups no matter how many people are using it. You figure it's some kind of giant cluster thing?
So tell me again why its safer other than it has fewer users?
It's safer because:
1. It's a cleaner, more modern design. IE's code problems (mostly design problems) go back to it's original code base nearly 10 years ago. Mozilla's code is mostly new. The vast majority of the Netscape code was jettisoned because it was such a mess.
2. It's not integrated into the OS. A vulnerability of the browser doesn't affect the mail client, file manager, update system, help pages, etc.
3. It was built by a group that sees security as a design problem, not a marketing problem. Microsoft still hasn't understood the lesson.
4. It allows users a much finer control of what content to allow and what to reject. Popups, java, javascript, and other contect can be excluded either completely or site-by-site with a few simple clicks.
5. It has safe and sane defaults.
Seriously you cant buy the anti-argument that its simply the program and not the amount of users.
It's not an anti-argument. It's a provable fact. Shall we examine the security of Apache and Sendmail against IIS and Exchange? IIS and Exchange should be successfully attacked much less according to your theory, since IIS and Exchange have a much smaller user base than Apache and Sendmail. That's provably not true.
Question to you. If you were a hacker looking to cause great amount of damage to the internet, would you choose Opera? Mozilla or IE?
I'd look for the most easily exploited code and then use it as a jump-off point. And that would be IE. The fact that IE is also the most used code is a nice benefit, but not really necessary.
Try not to confuse correlation and causation.
Thanks for posting this.
"its hard not to argue that since the coding is open that it is easier to crack and infect. "
Then why is all the cracking and infecting done to CLOSED source code, and none to OPEN source code??
Because the code is Open, the vast majority of bugs and just plain sloppy code are found because millions of eyes are looking at it.
That's the beauty of open source, it quickly migrates to perfection. Its innards are all right there in plain sight yet it STILL can't be cracked. That is the definition of quality - you can see exactly how it works but you still can't break in.
Its a well known addage in information technology that "Security by obscurity is no security at all".
Keeping your code secret does not make it secure.
Microsoft is secret - yet it is totally insecure.
Vastly more is to be gained by breaking into web servers than into Joe Sixpack's computer. Yet the only web servers routinely broken into are those running Microsoft IIS (closed source), and it accounts for less than 20% of all servers on the web - but 98% of all breakins.
If I was a hacker looking to break in, I would pick the SOFTEST TARGET. Not the most PLENTIFUL TARGET. Ask any thief.
I can't believe after 5 years of Microsoft's CLOSED source software inflicting billions of dollars of damage on the net and business that there is STILL someone who believe the Micorsoft B.S. that insecurity comes with popularity.
You really need to upgrade your education on this issue.
bookmark
Jiminy christmas you guys DID NOT ANSWER MY Fn QUESTION.
If Firefox was the number one browser with 95% of the market would it or would it not have as many issues as IE when it comes to ceratain security problems ie; pop-ups, spy-ware,mal-ware,hijack-ware? If you were a person looking to cause massive world wide internet propblems would you or would you not target the largest company out there?
Mozilla blocks popups no matter how many people are using it. You figure it's some kind of giant cluster thing?>>>>
Where in the world did you come up with that nonsense, seriously. Popups and hijackers, spy ware and others are specifically coded towards IE, of course IE is going to have more problems there. What does the amount of users have to do with it? Its all about what they are geared at. I cant believe I am having this argument.
Look I use firefox, I like it and will continue to use it. I just dont buy into the theory that IE is a totally inferior product because you say so, its inferior because its the target of the world community. And if Firefox ever got that big it would fallter also.
Then why is all the cracking and infecting done to CLOSED source code, and none to OPEN source code?? >>>
Because open source makes up less than 5% of the market. Why bother with it. Your question is similar to asking somebody why most drownings are caused by water, could it be because most people swim in water, bathe in it, drink it?
Lets not forget on your other argument here about closed source, remember they are a company, they are in it to make money.They can do it only at the expense of its consumer for so long.
I did answer your question. I'm sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted.
If Firefox was the number one browser with 95% of the market would it or would it not have as many issues as IE when it comes to ceratain security problems ie; pop-ups, spy-ware,mal-ware,hijack-ware?
The answer is NO.
Just like Apache, the number one web server, doesn't have as many issues as ISS.
Just like Sendmail, the number one mail server, doesn't have as many issues as Exchange.
Popups and hijackers, spy ware and others are specifically coded towards IE, of course IE is going to have more problems there.
No, they aren't, and I begin to see the problem here. You don't understand how the underlying technology works, so you don't understand why Mozilla works differently.
And if Firefox ever got that big it would fallter also.
And once again:
WRONG
I did answer your question. I'm sorry it wasn't the answer you wanted.>>
You did not.
The answer is NO.
Just like Apache, the number one web server, doesn't have as many issues as ISS.
Just like Sendmail, the number one mail server, doesn't have as many issues as Exchange. >>
So now I can compare a motorcycle to a car? Or my apple here to that orange in the fridge? ITs browser to browser you cant extrapolate because Apache is better than ISS then Firefox therefore will be better than IE.
No, they aren't, and I begin to see the problem here. You don't understand how the underlying technology works, so you don't understand why Mozilla works differently.>>>
Ever tried to install google toolbar on firefox? or yahoos toolbar? Its funny because it wont on mine, I wonder why that is? (did you know alot of mal-ware uses the same technology as them but they involuntary install it on your computer) Just curious since you say I dont understand the way it works. I am sure this is somehow making your case, but it doesnt.
and once again:
WRONG>>>
And there you go again, predicting the future, unequivicolly.
That said...
Ts browser to browser you cant extrapolate because Apache is better than ISS then Firefox therefore will be better than IE.
Your argument is that the popularity of a particular piece of software is related to the amount of security problems that it has.
I have offered two examples of how that argument is not valid, yet you continue to go way around the issue in an effort to keep from having to see the truth.
Ever tried to install google toolbar on firefox? or yahoos toolbar?
I fail to see how software add-ons have any relevance to the security of the software itself. Perhaps you can dig down deep into your programming or security experience and explain it to me.
(did you know alot of mal-ware uses the same technology as them but they involuntary install it on your computer)
I did know that. I also know that the more integrated the browser is into the operating system, the easier it is to exploit the computer at a lower level.
I also know that the idea that malware can be installed without the user knowing is a design flaw common to Microsoft software.
And I also know that the history of exploits and the seriousness of those exploits indicate that your position on the popularity of a bit of software having anything to do with it being exploited is silly.
I know I said I was ending this argument.
But I must apoligize I reread my posts, and it seems to me that I am the one being an a**. I dont mean to be on this, sometimes I get flustered.
I stand by my arguments though in either case, just my language can change.
Good point. I moved over to Firefox in January and have been very happy with it.
Cheers!
Updated, and thankee kindly for the headsup!
I just downloaded firefox. Can any other users out there tell me how you like it or dislike it.
Ping.
thanks for the tip.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
