firefox = Internet Explorer (firefox1.0.4 has 13 vulnerabilities )

hi

do you know how much vulnerabilities in firefox 1.04 ?
its 13 !!two of them are critical !!
do you know the total vulnerabilities in firefox from firefox 1.0 two 1.0.5 ?
its more than 50 vulnerabilities

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vulnerabilities.html#Firefox



its like Internet Explorer , every month you download at lest 4 patchs

do you think using Internet Explorer is more safer than firefox ?

 

Firefox is stll safer, simply based on the number of add ons that you can use to protect your system.

 

That is why I use this version, a lot of problems fixed

 

It makes a big difference that the Mozilla team puts out fixes asap.

 

It does seem like they try to stay on top of things.

 

please
can you prove the firefox is more secuer than IE ?

 

With all due respect, nothing of what you write here answers the question. All the reasons you give are purely theoretical, in that they indicate only a likelihood that Firefox is more secure.

From an actual evidence viewpoint, all we have to go on is the published list of security vulnerabilities. In that respect, the diminishing list of new IE vulnerabilities vs. the expanding list of new FF vulnerabilities tends to suggest that Firefox is indeed no more secure than IE. This is indicative of the growing (but still small) market share of FF compared to IE. As the FF 'target vector' increases, so will the number of vulnerabilities that are exposed, illustrating that the question of which browser is more secure can only be addressed for a given point in time. I suggest that it is a close call at this time.

One factor that is important, however, is that of configuration. From a security viewpoint IE is highly configurable, and the default configuration (especially for pre-WinXP SP2) is not as secure as it could be, shall we say. FF, on the other hand, is configured for security out of the box, so in practice the 'average user' using IE is probably still less secure than the 'average user' using FF (depending, possibly, what extensions the FF user also has installed). Of course this situation may also change over time, esp. with the coming arrival of IE7.

 

My guess as to why Firefox is more secure CURRENTLY lies in marketshare, as well as any manufacturer's technical design. One major reason that IE is more "exploitable" is because hackers and malicious software writers are and have for years now concentrated on ways to crack IE (after all, they'll had a much longer period of time to study and to do so, and no reason or other comparable product to turn their attention to). Once Firefox has been around for a while and established a larger marketshare, these perps will likely turn their attention towards ways to infiltrate the Firefox browser much more so than currently. Again, this is purely hypothesis on my part, but it is really based on just good, old fashioned common sense.

But I agree with the others that Firefox seems to release updates and patches more often and frequently than Microsoft. My guess is also that Microsoft would LOVE to see spyware writers turn their attention towards Mozilla for a change

 

IMO as long as FF and opera don't support activeX and vbscript they will always be more secure than IE.

bigc

 

- wrong.

 

Well, there's a great demonstration of intelligence Anyone else care to contribute such well-presented and reasoned wisdom?

 

wow, you should be a comedian - your sarcasm is so funny and clever.

Get a clue. If I wanted or cared to elaborate I would have. If he doesn't understand by now, he's not going to and I could care less.

 

I agree.

Does that really mean ... "sorry, I am unable to elaborate"?

 

wrong

 

As mentioned by ronjor....let's keep to the discussion....which I believe concerns browser security....or lack there of ?

 

That's also very true, bigc, but what about security software vendors that use ActiveX? McAfee, for one, does....and so does KAV. For me to use my Kaspersky on-line web scanner, I must use IE (for ActiveX reasons). There are good and bad ActiveX controls...and I suppose that IE needs to do a better job of recognition in this area. But it would help if the software vendors did a better jo on their part as well. For example, I have downloaded SEVERAL software programs where I received the "publisher unknown, signature could not be verified....do you wish to continue" messages. Therefore, I think it's up to the software vendors to help do a better job on THEIR part to help in this situation as well.

 

also windowsupdate.com
to update your windows
it need activeX

activeX not bad !!!!

also FF dose not have (web content zone) like IE , there no trusted and restricted site , you cant custom the security level for zones

 

There are some honest uses of activeX and it works well, but it also takes a bit of common sense to figure which is safe to use or not. It all goes back to (user beware) Like everything else everyone has an opinion and mine is that I believe that opera is and has been the safest browser for a while now, the others are still trying to catch up.

bigc

 

do you thank opera more safer becasue it is not famous like IE and FF? , because opera not free
pepole love free software like FF and IE

the hackers do not care about opera because its not famous like IE and FF

 

my opera is free, a little ad in the header is not much to put up with for a very good browser. and I don't think it is safe because of market share. it is just a good secure browser that has been around a long time.

see ad in screen shot

 

Taken from Brian Livingstone's newsletter issue number 53

• IE suffered from unpatched security holes for 359 days in 2004. According to Scanit, there were only 7 days out of 366 in 2004 during which IE had no unpatched security holes. This means IE had no official patch available against well-publicized vulnerabilities for 98% of the year.

• Attacks on IE weaknesses circulated "in the wild" for 200 of those days. Scanit records the first sighting of actual working hacker code on the Internet. In this way, the firm was able to determine how many days an IE user was exposed to possible harm. When Microsoft released a patch for an IE problem, Scanit "stopped the clock" on the period of vulnerability.

• Mozilla and Firefox patched all vulnerabilities before hacker code circulated. Scanit found that the Mozilla family of browsers, which share the same code base, went only 26 days in 2004 during which a Windows user was using a browser with a known security hole. Another 30 days involved a weakness that was only in the Mac OS version. Scanit reports that each vulnerability was patched before exploits were running on the Web. This resulted in zero days when a Mozilla or Firefox user could have been infected.

Cheers

 

This is a real good read here after reading about the weaknesses in IE, scroll about half way down the page and read about opera security.

 

I wonder if Microsoft comes out with an absolutely fantastic browser in the future....one that proves to be much more secure and reliable than Firefox, Opera, etc., if people will give it praise with the same enthusiasm, vigor and willingness that they use to criticize it now. Or if everyone's mind has already been made up, and they will continue to bash it simply because that's what they've been trained and led to believe, and not give it it's just desserts and proper credit due "because it's Microsoft".

Afterall, how many posts do we read here in these very forums where people make comments like "I REFUSE to use IE", or "I'll NEVER go back to IE". etc.