Did the browser wars finally end in 2014?

LOL! In all fairness, it was probably good once.

 

Not to go off tangent, but I want to make sure this doesn't mislead people; Norton 2015 likely would have found it IF you were using Chrome since it has been established that Norton seems to only be really effective with Chrome and possibly Vanilla Firefox (it is browser dependent), it SURELY would have found it if you tried to execute the trojan (reputation). Trojans by their nature have terrible reputations, and unknown applications with low reputations would also be flagged. Did you actually try to run it with Norton?

Just like how SAS and Spybot used to be good. Norton used to be bad. Times change.

 

I'm sure Norton has improved, let's face it, it couldn't have got worse. I only used Norton, 2008, because it was supplied by my ISP. I'll never use it again. The service provider had so many customer complaints about Norton it changed to supplying McAfee as a replacement. I didn't think McAfee was much of an improvement to be honest. Unlike Norton though it was comparatively bug free. Unfortunately it was too heavy for my notebook so I found a lighter freeware alternative AV.

I only run one computer with Windows (7 HP) now and that has had MSE on since the box was custom built for me. The same computer also has MBAM and SAS. MSE might not be what it once was but it is simple to use and relatively trouble free. My laptop, notebook and tablet all run alternative operating systems to Windows. In fact, I still run that old notebook, but now with Ubuntu, thus negating the need for an AV.

I doubt anything I have posted will 'mislead' anyone as it is readily apparent that they are subjective experiences. All I knew was that after a full Spybot and Norton scan my notebook was apparently clean, contrary to what Google told me. I then ran a full SAS scan, within five minutes it discovered the trojan and I quarantined it. I reported it on the SAS forums and they reckoned it was probably a genuine trojan rather than a false positive. I downloaded MBAM that day and ran that too just to make sure. As the trojan was quarantined MBAM found nothing anyway. The x64 SAS is fast and works well, I consider it another layer in my defence strategy on Windows.

Getting back to the topic of browsers, I think browser hardening is the first line of defence. Running NoScript on SeaMonkey may have prevented the trojan downloading in the first place. Ever since, I have run NoScript on SM and Firefox (even on Linux).

 

That's back when SAS was actually pretty well regarded, and not allegedly 'almost' useless by today's standards. (like MSE) By having a staunch doctrine of 'never use again' for products/services you are self limiting. I used to be that way myself in my younger years. These days, look at previously bad products like Trend, Norton, and find them top-kit, and scoring exceedingly well. Anyway, I just didn't want anyone to get a false impression as you are speaking over half a decade in the past. I don't consider that experience relevant, or even noteworthy today. Others may have different opinions. Back on topic.

 

Well, considering your asseveration that Norton would almost certainly have discovered the trojan I contracted is a subjunctive statement not based on any kind of evidence, it kind of beggars the question of why you are taking the time and effort in replying to my un-noteworthy irrelevancies in the first place.

Besides, you are jumping to conclusions about my software application decisions based on very little evidence. I don't have a staunch doctrine of 'never use again' for most products and services, just Norton.

That is my subjective opinion.

 

That is not perfect list. To limit info sending, you have to change default search engine other than Google (preferably anonymous search engine such as DuckDuckGo) and disable Google Update (then you have to manually update Chrome when update is available, and have to regularly update your extensions via developer mode). Also disable crash report by --disable-breakpad switch. Ah, I forget to mention but make sure you downloaded via official Chrome download site to avoid promotion tag. There're still other things you can do to enhance privacy and security, see this though it's too not perfect list. I don't disable some weak cipher as some sites needed it, and there're still some switch I removed for some reason, while there will be more switch available now but I didn't aware or know in that time.

 

I've just started to use IE. I had FF before.

 

The search engine and google update are not really taking away from privacy neither is some of the setting I said disable in my last post: http://www.insanitybit.com/2012/06/23/srware-iron-browser-a-real-private-alternative-to-chrome-21/ to me Chrome has really good privacy features is 99& open source and is quick and secure and people say "Chrome is spying, omg the NSA is watching you" and all of that crap just from using Chrome and I wish people could respect Chrome more because it is a really awesome browser especially with Gorhills extensions and just has private has Firefox in my opinion with Gorhills extensions. (Not directed at anyone person)

 

Just great for privacy, isn't it?

HTTPS can be set as your super-cookie

Well, Google doesn't look exactly like a privacy-apostle to me but if you say so...
As for secure, you are aware that Chrome had the most security bugs among all browsers last year.

 

Yes https everywhere is great for privacy and also I think umatrix would block that attack with it blacklisting everything except for css,image,script, and XHR and strict https feature and all privacy options selected and I also got plugins click to play and third party cookies blocked and local data set until I clear my browser and I got ublock also. Yes, the most security bugs in its sandbox most are remote code execution which they are not much to worry about. Also would you rather have the most security bugs or the least security bugs found I think I would rather have the most because that means white hats are finding a lot of vulnerabilities in code and not one time has been exploited in the wild at all and that says something. Internet Explorer, and Firefox both have been exploited in the wild a few times.

 

So I said info sending, not privacy as def of privacy vary on each person's view. I agree to Google Update, but as to default search engine it can be privacy issue. I'm not sure if you're aware that it is not only about suggest.
"Chrome is spying" is somewhat too much, but still there's a privacy concern especially when you sync Chrome with mobile devices. Firefox is not private in default setting, but can be quite private by configuration while Chrome don't allow such granular config.

He is not talking about Google but Chrome, however I somewhat agree with you about it. If Google looks like it respects privacy, that is because they're "forced" to do so (not literally, but practically) as giant company. But they're ad company and for them what makes money is big data derived from us. Some may argue who extract your data and abuse it from vast statistical data, but there's already case that one employ abused it (I don't post the link as my link is not in English, but you'll find it easily. It is he abused privacy of a girl he attracted). Oh, and by chance we now know NSA did same thing. It seems it's almost unavoidable that when big organization got large data, some employ abuse it.

But as to vuln, though Malwar already explained, this is widely seen misunderstanding. More vuln reported is basically good thing, it means more vuln fixed and many people (whitehat hacker) watching this product. Especially when it comes to Chrome, it's more than obvious, Google gives big amount of bug bounty for their product while Google's own vuln research team is very efficient to find bugs (not only for their product. see who found bugs in firefox or Microsoft product). OTOH if widely known product don't have many bugs reported it most probably means there're many potentially exploitable bugs left, it's especially true to complicated program like browser.

 

Yes I agree.

 

Who is the maker of Chrome? Isn't it Google?
Besides, it seems that Malwar didn't even bother to open the link I provided or he did but wasn't able to understand the reading.

Does it? Especially at the time when it sneaked on computers as bundleware.

That's an interesting theory. I've also read that somewere. I can't think of a better PR spin.
So someone who goes very often to the doctor is very healthy while someone who haven't visited a doctor for a decade must be very ill. He just doesn't know because there was no doctor to tell him.

Fact is that with an extremely frequent release cycle it's impossible to soundly test your product but you are using your customers as guinea pigs.

 

I did read your link you provided, why was I not able to understand it? umatrix would protect against this because it block all connections to the page that are not https and https everywhere makes sure they are encrypted all the way and umatrix has user agent spoofing and referrer so it would block this attack.

 

Well, I think it's unlikely that Chrome has a bigger market share than IE, I don't think that a lot of people will take the time to download another browser. On the other hand, I do know that a lot of friends do use Chrome.

And yes it's a shame they let Presto die, but that isn't the biggest problem because other engines like Blink, Trident and Gecko are quite fast. The problem is that the GUI and usability of the new Opera is a joke. Just look at the horrible bookmarking system.

 

i agree with the article, it is over, at least for 2015. chrome has the crown and will have for a very very long time.
personally i really like to sea a contender, for myself to replace chrome. hate the fact that i HAVE to use chrome!

 

This is getting weird, I do not see any skin options, do you perhaps need to give Maxthon network access? Or are you using a newer version? I have downloaded the latest version from the Maxthon homepage.

 

Your reply is the best evidence that you didn't understand the reading.

 

See this: http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=0&qptimeframe=M&qpsp=191&qpcustomd=0

Chrome has gained a lot of market share, but IE is still way more popular. I'm also amazed by the 1% market share of Opera, it's one of the best ever (Opera 11/12), but not promoted that well apparently. Also, what about Maxthon, I thought it was highly popular in China?

 

Yes I did, Chrome with my addons and chrome privacy settings and umatrix all privacy options selected would block this because of the user agent spoofing, referrer spoofing and strict https etc.... https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=104935 when I clear my browsing data it is gone anyway but it is not there because of my settings/extensions...

 

After reading this thread my answer to question posted in thread title would be: No.

 

I don't know. I posted screenshots of the latest version for Windows. If you click 'Skins' as indicated in the drop-down menu the 'Select Skin' dialogue box opens. I doubt it actually has to be online to do this. IIRC the PortableApps version is exactly the same in this respect.

I only run Maxthon on Windows and Android as I haven't had much success with it on Linux (Ubuntu).

 

LOL, you gotta be kidding me right? I have downloaded the latest Maxthon v4 beta, and now I do see the "select skin" option, but that is NOT what I call tabs on bottom! The tabs should be placed on the bottom of the screen (near the Windows Taskbar) and not beneath the address-bar. And where is the menu-bar? You see what I mean with "downhill"?

 

At one time the tabs could be placed right at the bottom (Mx 3). I just think that most users never utilised that option so it was removed as extraneous or superfluous code. I suppose it's a matter of taste, I personally think Maxthon's improving. There again, I like the 'Australis' Firefox as well. lol

 

I haven't used any of the major browsers for years, except at work, for the simple reason that I can not get them to work the way I want without installing addons. Rather than finding and installing addons, I prefer to use a browser which can be configured to work the way I want without addons.

Currently I am using TheWorld, which is Chrome based, and prior to that was using Sleipnir - which I will go back to using soon.