Symantec: Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE

[bigc73542]

full story here (http://news.com.com/Symantec+Mozilla+browsers+more+vulnerable+than+IE/2100-1002_3-5873273.html?part=rss&tag=5873273&subj=news) Opera is noticably absent from the report ;)

[ErikAlbert]

Well bigC, one day you will write a post with the title :

"Symantec: Opera browser more vulnerable than IE and Firefox" ;)

[Mrkvonic]

Hi,
Looks to me someone paid big bucks for advertisement.
The things stated are true, but only half true:
Firefox has 18 critical vulnerabilities discovered - all were patched within a day.
IE had 13 critical vulnerabilities discovered - not all were patched and usually it took about a MONTH for Microsoft to release their monthly update.
Firefox is not embedded in the system - there's no reason for Firefox to meddle with system files. Explorer, svchost and other processes are not dependant on Firefox and vice versa.
IE IS a part of the system and when corrupted it may and will ruin the OS as well.

Number of DISCOVERED vulnerabilities is a GOOD thing. The more discovered the sooner they get patched. Open source Firefox has more chance of being debugged by the community. IE is a close source and therefore practically no one except the manufacturer can properly debug the flaws.

By the way, the above story is the same like reports telling Norton AV has 99.8% efficiency in "independent" test, whereas any other semi-decent free anti-virus catches more than Norton.

Mrk

[ronjor]

Symantec report sparks safe-browser debate

-{ Quote: "So does that mean that the Mozilla-based browser is less secure than proponents have said and that Internet Explorer is more secure than believed?
Not exactly, according to security experts. " }-
Story (http://www.computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,104785,00.html?source=x73)

[ErikAlbert]

Amusing all these different opinions and countings amongst security experts.

[toploader]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/09/09/firefox_security_flap

[toploader]

Monthly browser share figures, from NetApplications (July 05)

* Microsoft Internet Explorer - 87.2 per cent
* FireFox - 8.07 per cent
* Safari - 2.13 per cent
* Netscape - 1.50 per cent
* Mozilla - 0.52 per cent
* Opera - 0.49 per cent
* Other - 0.09 per cent

August figures

* Microsoft Internet Explorer - 86.31
* FireFox - 8.27
* Safari - 2.20
* Netscape - 2.02
* Opera - 0.62
* Mozilla - 0.51

[TNT]

-{ Quote: "full story here (http://news.com.com/Symantec+Mozilla+browsers+more+vulnerable+than+IE/2100-1002_3-5873273.html?part=rss&tag=5873273&subj=news) Opera is noticably absent from the report ;)" }-

"Mozilla Web browsers are potentially more vulnerable to attack than Microsoft's Internet Explorer, according to a Symantec report…There is one caveat: Symantec counts only those security flaws that have been confirmed by the vendor. According to security monitoring company Secunia, there are 19 security issues that Microsoft still has to deal with for Internet Explorer, while there are only three for Firefox"

http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2005/09/firefox-honeymoon-over.html

[bigc73542]

I just don't see how IE will ever be near as secure as Mozilla based and Opera browsers seeing as how IE has it's roots fully embedded in the operating system. If anything gets past IE it has a super highway right into the system. And by the way, I just posted the info, but that doesn't mean I believe it. ;)

[The Hammer]

-{ Quote: "full story here (http://news.com.com/Symantec+Mozilla+browsers+more+vulnerable+than+IE/2100-1002_3-5873273.html?part=rss&tag=5873273&subj=news) Opera is noticably absent from the report ;)" }-I believe it's covered with the phrase "alternative browsers" in the article. ;)

[ronjor]

As long as we use software, there will be bugs, security holes, etc. no matter the program.
The only safe way to communicate is to whisper in an ear--if you trust them. :)

[Kegel]

-{ Quote: "Hi,
Looks to me someone paid big bucks for advertisement.
The things stated are true, but only half true:
Firefox has 18 critical vulnerabilities discovered - all were patched within a day.
IE had 13 critical vulnerabilities discovered - not all were patched and usually it took about a MONTH for Microsoft to release their monthly update.
Firefox is not embedded in the system - there's no reason for Firefox to meddle with system files. Explorer, svchost and other processes are not dependant on Firefox and vice versa.
IE IS a part of the system and when corrupted it may and will ruin the OS as well.

Number of DISCOVERED vulnerabilities is a GOOD thing. The more discovered the sooner they get patched. Open source Firefox has more chance of being debugged by the community. IE is a close source and therefore practically no one except the manufacturer can properly debug the flaws.

By the way, the above story is the same like reports telling Norton AV has 99.8% efficiency in "independent" test, whereas any other semi-decent free anti-virus catches more than Norton.

Mrk" }-


LOL. Are you what they refer to as a Firefox Fanboy? LMAO. Face it dude. Firefox sucks. SLow and insecure.



post edited to remove questionable reference made in bad taste. ==Bigc

[Trooper]

-{ Quote: "LOL. Are you what they refer to as a Firefox Fanboy? LMAO. Face it dude. Firefox sucks. SLow and insecure. " }-

Nice way to get yourself a ban. ::)


edited to remove questionable content in quote===bigc

[Mrkvonic]

-{ Quote: "LOL. Are you what they refer to as a Firefox Fanboy? LMAO. Face it dude. Firefox sucks. SLow and insecure.



post edited to remove questionable reference made in bad taste. ==Bigc " }-

Hi,
I'm not a firefox fanboy, I'm more of a firefox fanshemale....
On topic: Firefox is only slow and insecure if you do not use it properly.
I'm facing it, dude. Firefox is fast and secure.
Mrk

[toploader]

Linux users please note - http://secunia.com/advisories/16869

[secure this]

-{ Quote: "It ocurred to me that immediate announcement of FF vulnerabulities is critical to the process of develping solutions. To avoid announcing vulnerabilities is to isolate the problems solvers from potential solutions. Microsofts " solution" it the hide the vulnerablity in the hope that a small cadre of MS coders can solve it before the problem is discovered. The FF solution is an elegant , rapid, brute force solution based upon numbers. While the MS solution is a slow response based deception, deceit and magical thinking.

After whining about some aspect of the Firefox crew, I feel obligated to stand up for them on this idiotic Symantec claim. What Symantec doesn't tell you: Microsoft has serious reported problems over six months old, yet unfixed. Anybody know of when Firefox wasn't patched within a few days of being notified of and having a security problem confirmed -- a month at most!

Firefox acknowledges and openly discusses vulnerabilities when they arise, as well as reasonable work-arounds, as they work to fix them, unlike Microsoft who initially denies them, then claims it's a "feature," then something really lame about keeping your programs updated, until finally the major press and industry forces them to fix the damned thing six to twelve months or more later.

This whole thing smells of Microsoft getting nervous about MSIE, especially that the still beta MSIE-7 still can't hold a candle to outgoing Firefox 1.0.x. It also smells of a deal between Microsoft and Symantec for "outside" carping.

Now, shall we discuss Symantec's long-standing unpatched bugs and their built-in spyware?" }-...../

[Bubba]

"Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE"

It will always be a merry go round and each brand of browser is vulnerable. All We as users can do is do our part in stopping the exploit by properly securing the browser, keeping it updated and learn about it's potential. It also helps to know how we get exploited by what some view as simple code.

[dread]

http://www.neowin.net/comments.php?id=30534&category=main
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020330,39219186,00.htm

[Pollmaster]

-{ Quote: ""Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE"

It will always be a merry go round and each brand of browser is vulnerable. All We as users can do is do our part in stopping the exploit by properly securing the browser, keeping it updated and learn about it's potential. It also helps to know how we get exploited by what some view as simple code." }-

That's why it good to have multiple browsers. Oh today there is some unpatched critical IE exploit? Let's use mozilla. or viceversa. Or Opera... or K-melon or...

Of course, in the future with mutating browsers, you don't even need to do that. Just run a mutator string over the browser, and recompile you have your very own unique browser, that can't be targetted. Metamorphic browsers anyone?