"A Virtually Secure Browser" by Seth Misenar

Discussion in 'sandboxing & virtualization' started by ssj100, Oct 4, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ssj100

    ssj100 Guest

  2. Doodler

    Doodler Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Posts:
    219
    Agreed.
     
  3. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    Yes, the author completely missed this important security feature of SandBoxie. However, it seems he's more interested in a solution that benefits enterprise environments, where a virtualization application can be centrally managed, and this is where Thinapp excels, albeit at a much greater cost.
     
  4. andyman35

    andyman35 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Posts:
    2,336
    Very true,most reviews seem to focus on just the one aspect of SBIE without really explaining it's wondrous depths.
     
  5. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    About SRP

    Most system managers use a Software Restriction Policy for deny execute. With numerus search results on SSJ+LUA+SRP, I trust you are familiar with that concept. :p

    About Sandboxie

    Another reason not mentioned is that the author obviously is happy with the web 3.0/cloud re-incarnation of the 'thin client' concept. Only we seem to be stuck with fat PC's with no smartcard/biometric based security and 'travelling user profiles'.

    Maybe he hopes that Intel and Google might cause some stir with their new 'lean' OS-ses. Maybe he hopes that netbook and notebook producers (which are marketing biometric access as a additional feature) will push desktop producers to offer the same. So maybe he dreams of some sort of biometric access on lean os-ses with Web 4.0/cloud 2.0, where ordinary PC users do not store data on their home PC, but have it secured and accessible from the cloud.

    In anticipation of this dream Thin-Appp is the best choice in corporate environments, because it fits in just perfect in the centrally managed thin client dream revived. SBIE-fans: I would not worry to much :isay:

    About Chrome/Iron
    It really it is a pity the reviewer did not go deeper on the added security of the Chrome/Iron browser in a x64 environment (since SBIE will not be released on x64).

    Regards Kees
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2009
  6. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    I tend to agree with this, because I'm having difficulty finding virtualizing/sandboxing software that matches the level of security SB provides while matching SB's minimal footprint on system resources. IMO, Shadowdefender is the only product I've tested that comes close.
     
  7. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    did you try DefenseWall?it may not be same but similar product and it is good program:thumb:
     
  8. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    Yes. Actually twice, one of the trials on my VirtualBox setup, both cases XP, and it's a great program at what it does, no doubt, but unfortunately it causes very noticeable sluggishness on my browsing speeds.
     
  9. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    that is good:thumb: it is fast here:)
     
  10. Ilya Rabinovich

    Ilya Rabinovich Developer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Posts:
    1,543
    Strange, it shouldn't be like that.You had to call for support this case.
     
  11. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    I'm quite adventurous, so I'll give it a whirl on my Vista system and post how things went.
     
  12. jmonge

    jmonge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    12,883
    Location:
    Canada
    i want to mention that i didnt choose sandboxie cause the browsing slow down only but i personally prefer DefenseWall over all;) preference choice:thumb:
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.