A lot of browsers still vulnerable.

[DavidR]

Tech, that's wierd since I browse the fora with only the images on but no java at all.

The problem is that I don't know, in Maxthon, if I disable download of 'Scripts' I think I'll disable javascripts too.
I can only disable 'Java applicatives' but this is not the same.
If I disable scripts, no smiles.

That is strange I just tried it with Maxthon no scripts, no Java Applets and I have smilies (mind you I didn't expect it to be different.

[polonus]

Hi Umath,

I write all these postings of mine with all users in mind. And I know of course you surf with sense, really I would not expect otherwise. And to you Jarmo P. Yes, this is my friend as you always expected, and that is why we use JS only when it is safe to use, so SELECTIVELY In case of doubt use Dr. Web's hyperlink scanner plug-in, and you will get a report on what to expect when you later click this link through. Also good when you try to download things, you getthe packers, the code etc. With Avast running inside the browser there is not so much to worry about. But prevention is always better then having to let Avast correct it when it is trying to run.
Then I just updated automatically to the Filterset G and G-Beta-Whitelist 2005-10-31a, to give me just that extra bit of protection. This is the practical approach, make sure you do not run the risk,

greets,

polonus

[Umath]

It has 2 javascripts according to NoScript.
You mean NoScript and not MyCroft? I did a google search and MyCroft seems to be a search plugin?
[...]
Edit: Certainly no java in google. Java is not the same as javascript.

I meant both java and java script.  I have never turned on java/script at Google site but I don't think I cannot use some functions because of that so I wondered.

You mean NoScript and not MyCroft? I did a google search and MyCroft seems to be a search plugin?

Yes, rather than portal search pages, personally I use search plug-ins, which enable quicker access.  Also, Mycroft is different from other suspicious parasite plug-ins.

polonus, I see your point.

[polonus]

Hello readers of this thread,

Here is a good link with advice for Secure Browser Configuration for IE type and Firefox type browsers:
consider this: http://cybercoyote.org/security/browsers.shtml

As you read this you can see, why we use NoScript to lift the ban on script only if we trust the site. Well the thing about third party cookies goes for itself. Especially in firefox and Flock you have to pay attention when the url text is YELLOW and you get a pop up window, this could be for a malware download. These browsers can also be affected by malicious installs via Java applet NoScript prevents this or pre-hyperlink scanning with the Dr. Web plug-in.

greets,

polonus

[DavidR]

Unless this is some sort of P-of-C test the "Here is a good link with advice for Secure Browser Configuration for IE type and Firefox type browsers:" link is down or a typo.

[polonus]

Hi DavidR,

The link is not to a test, but to a faq text. But read the lasts bit,
maybe shtml is not supported for you.

greets,

polonus

[DavidR]

It is working now, shtml is supported by firefox.