Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: Dch48 on December 14, 2011, 12:29:23 AM
-
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539 (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539)
The testing was commissioned by Google so keep that in mind. It shows IE9 as having the fewest vulnerabilities however. Firefox fails miserably.
-
No matter, I'll still continue to use FireFox as a happy user. :)
Google might of picked those things to test in because they knew that their browser supported most of it. ::)
-
No matter, I'll still continue to use FireFox as a happy user. :)
Google might of picked those things to test in because they knew that their browser supported most of it. ::)
I have no doubt of that.
-
That info certainly conflicts with the information we've been discussing on the malwarebytes forum where the tests show Google Chrome as being the least secure http://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?showtopic=99893
Test your browser here http://www.yourbrowsermatters.com/#/home
-
well i left IE and firefox long ago and shifted to chrome ;D
IE and firefox are totally unstable in themselves i had problems with both...u can search for my posts u will see my probem with IE pss..thanks again craigh for solving that problem :)
Firefox-well i uninstalled it long ago on my old pc this laptop is running with IE and chrome...IE is just a backup chrome is the boss ;D
-
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539 (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539)
The testing was commissioned by Google so keep that in mind. It shows IE9 as having the fewest vulnerabilities however. Firefox fails miserably.
Counting patched vulnerabilities is meaningless when it comes to assessing security- as the report actually points out.
ZDNet is all about sensational journalism- no wonder they didn't put the graphic up without this caveat- and any claim that "Firefox is less secure" or "IE is more secure" is of course lapped up by people with an ideological axe to grind.
Go and read the actual report your story links to for the full facts.
-
Given all this information, we can conclude that the browsers are different. Development
methodologies, corporate structure and patch release infrastructure all play a role in making dissimilar
graphs. However, none of these pieces of information can be used to draw a security related conclusion.
Accuvant Labs report.
Firefox fails miserably.
Amazing how people can see what they want to see in a report like this. Strange how some people have an ideological problem with Firefox.
http://dontsurfinthenude.blogspot.com/2011/07/safest-web-browser.html
-
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539 (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539)
The testing was commissioned by Google so keep that in mind. It shows IE9 as having the fewest vulnerabilities however. Firefox fails miserably.
Counting patched vulnerabilities is meaningless when it comes to assessing security- as the report actually points out.
ZDNet is all about sensational journalism- no wonder they didn't put the graphic up without this caveat- and any claim that "Firefox is less secure" or "IE is more secure" is of course lapped up by people with an ideological axe to grind.
Go and read the actual report your story links to for the full facts.
According to the study, which I clearly said may be biased, Firefox does fail (in the particular study) compared to the other two. Just reading what they posted leaves no other conclusion. I agree that the number of vulnerabilities doesn't matter much but I just pointed that out to all the IE bashers who always say it has the most. It may have in the past, but not any more. I did read some of the full report and it pretty much backs up the summary given at ZDnet. I didn't have the time, (or the desire) to read all 140 pages though.
If you use Chrome and read the release notes for all the new versions, you will see many vulnerabilities being patched. Many more than for IE and a lot are rated as critical. I don't use FF so can't say about that one. They also used old versions of Chrome and a boatload of things have been patched since then in that browser. We're now on 16 and they were testing 12 and 13.
I like Chrome on my XP machine because it is a lot faster than IE8 but on this one, Win7, and the Vista machine, we use IE9 and are totally satisfied.
-
According to the study, which I clearly said may be biased, Firefox does fail (in the particular study) compared to the other two. Just reading what they posted leaves no other conclusion.
That you obviously haven't done, because it states:
Given all this information, we can conclude that the browsers are different. Development methodologies, corporate structure and patch release infrastructure all play a role in making dissimilar graphs. However, none of these pieces of information can be used to draw a security related conclusion.
-
I didn't have the time, (or the desire) to read all 140 pages though.
That says it all.
I did read some of the full report and it pretty much backs up the summary given at ZDnet.
No it doesn't. It flat out says that the summary at ZDNet should not be drawn from their study.
-
All I can say is two words only it completely B**L S**T, when Firefox release the next version soon say v9.0 or v10.0 maybe and it will become a secure browser very much like Chrome their no proof at moment until we see the version and we can judge for ourselves ;)
-
It is also by Accuvant
Accuvant is the only research driven information security partner delivering alignment between IT security and business objectives, clarity to complex security challenges and confidence in enterprise security decisions.
http://www.accuvant.com/about-us
Get the reports:
Supporting Tools + Data
http://www.accuvant.com/capability/accuvant-labs/security-research/browser-security-comparison-quantitative-approach
I agree with Dch48
-
Test your browser here http://www.yourbrowsermatters.com/#/home
I scored 4 out of 4 with IE9 64bit and 32bit. :)
I do use SpywareBlaster as well.
-
The computer I'm on right now uses IE 10. (Windows 8) But I'm using Chrome 16.
The only reason I'm not using FF is because of the problem with add-ons not working when new
versions come out.
I never have that with Chrome.
We are still talking about a browser and we all have favorites.
The article itself sounds like a political statement and not exactly based on
actual facts but simply on something that grabs attention even if it's not exactly
the truth.
-
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539 (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/new-study-claims-that-chrome-is-the-most-secure-browser/9839?tag=nl.e539)
The testing was commissioned by Google so keep that in mind. It shows IE9 as having the fewest vulnerabilities however. Firefox fails miserably.
There is still hope for Firefox. I hope they don't end up like Netscape.
Version 9, 10 and 11 looks promising.
-
Hi folks,
I browsing with Chrome 16 via Chrome PrivacyGuard with a.o. NotScripts and Better Pop Up Blocker and "Blocker" extensions active and even if I allow all with these extensions I get "WE CAN'T GIVE YOU A SCORE FOR YOUR BROWSER" on Your Browser Matters' site.
So what does that mean? Now I can tweak Chrome to my likings, I still do like Firefox and flock, but somehow cannot make myself go back to use them. Feels just like an old romance to me ;D ,
polonus
-
Test your browser here http://www.yourbrowsermatters.com/#/home
I scored 4 out of 4 with IE9 64bit and 32bit. :)
I do use SpywareBlaster as well.
4 out 4 for me without spywareblaster ;D
-
Test your browser here http://www.yourbrowsermatters.com/#/home
I scored 4 out of 4 with IE9 64bit and 32bit. :)
I do use SpywareBlaster as well.
It's a Microsoft site which will tell you you're secure if you're using Microsoft.
A little more scepticism might be appropriate on a security forum: I mean, if people are this naive here, do any of us know what we're talking about?
The MS security product in question is SmartScreen which has a huge false positive rate.
http://dontsurfinthenude.blogspot.com/2011/08/microsofts-bad-reputations.html
If avast! had that sort of false positive rate, there'd be howls of protest, yet for the Microsoft fans, it's fine.
-
Well again, I got: HOW WELL IS YOUR BROWSER PROTECTING YOU?
We do not have any data for your browser, so we can’t give your browser a score,
WE CAN'T GIVE YOU A SCORE FOR YOUR BROWSER. and all in capitals, so they are shouting this at me, very rude behabiour from these smart screen technology promoting boys,
pol
-
It's a Microsoft site which will tell you you're secure if you're using Microsoft.
A little more scepticism might be appropriate on a security forum: I mean, if people are this naive here, do any of us know what we're talking about?
The MS security product in question is SmartScreen which has a huge false positive rate.
http://dontsurfinthenude.blogspot.com/2011/08/microsofts-bad-reputations.html
If avast! had that sort of false positive rate, there'd be howls of protest, yet for the Microsoft fans, it's fine.
Its best to not surf in the nude and most likely you will be arrested as there are laws for doing anything in the nude. ;)
Maybe you need to switch to Linux as that is about as nude as it gets! ;)
Doctor Tux agrees with you:
Linux System Consulting Services
http://www.doctortux.com
-
I liked the info when I went here: http://www.networkadvertising.org/managing/opt_out.asp
See: http://events.adchemy.com/visitor/auuid/nai-status?nocache=0.8290456
Only active cookie I had was for Yahoo: Yahoo! Ad Network
(now including Dapper)
But I won't probably get an extra point from the yourbrowser matters guys,
polonus
-
I can say this without hesitation. I have never had a false positive from Smartscreen, but I have had a few , not many at all, from Avast.