Is Firefox still the safest web browser?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean here. Can you elaborate?

 

Just talking about security strategies. I think the browser is still important. That's where I face web in a not-so-controlled-environment.

 

What risks/ performance costs are you referring to?

And I'm not sure what layers in the OS you mean or do you mean separately from the browser?

lol sorry it's late and I'm a bit tired, waiting on some email

 

For example, I could add Comodo suite here and cover all those things Matousec proved it covers and that almost all other security solutions don't cover.

Or I could add Norton that has outstanding malware detection rates according to PCMAG.

But I won't, because I know performance will be affected. And performance matters much more for me.

Separately from the browser. For example, UAC / Defender / Windows Firewall. I disable all, lol.

 

Ah, I see. Yes, I'm the same way.

Gotcha, I wasn't sure if we were talking about browsers or not =p so I was confused.

I too much prefer OS-based security. In fact it's really not a "preference" so much as a demand. =p

 

BTW UAC I don't really disable, but it never pops up me anything.

 

Yeah I rarely see UAC.

In win8 it currently pops up every time the task manager opens but I assume that'll change.

 

The trick download. Hm. I don't have any extra layer protecting me from that, when I'm on my portable Firefox or on IE9 - except what the browsers offer.

That's OK for me.

I know that all possible extra layers for the trick download can fail, so i prefer to rely on my common sense, which never failed for me in the last 6 years or so, and comes with absolute 0 performance/usability costs. If I'm suspicious, I can always check the downloaded file with virustotal and/or others before running it, lol.

 

Where does he say that? On the contrary, there are still Chrome specific issues.

 

I mentioned Maone remark that Chrome ships with its XSS auditor disabled in post #122. Has this really changed in the meantime?

 

After I had extensively used IE9 and GC, I experienced that
none of them offers the ABP effectiveness of Firefox...

 

No, you just can't take it out of context like this I'm afraid. No one in their right mind would surf without an AV. With the possible exception of sandboxing/virtualisation.

Doh! Now you tell me. Either way, Chrome extensions are not as developed as Mozilla one's as a whole. I don't think anyone would really try & deny that.

If nothing affects ad blocking why do ads still get through sometimes on some pages on Chrome? I'm just not making this up.

Examples? Jeez Louise ... where do I start? ABP, Ghostery & Flashblock are simpler & just don't have the same functionality as their Mozilla equivalents. You know what I think of ABP, Ghostery often will miss trackers that are caught on Firefox, the Fx version of Ghostery will delete flash & Silverlight cookies on exit & has more performance options than its Chrome counterpart. This pattern is repeated with others, don't get me started about IE Tab, it is easier just to open IE!. You will have to just accept this about Chrome's extensions. Some work relatively well, but comparing them with Firefox's is a bit like comparing a Lotus 7 with a Bentley. They'll both get you from A to B, but the ride is a bit smoother in the Bentley & it probably has a mini-bar. WOT seems fine on Chrome though.

You really are in denial about this. I think the next stage is anger ...

Well, I'm no psychologist, but you can see a pattern emerging here can't you?

Remember what David Hume said about inferring too much from too little information.

If it's recognised as malware of course.

There are always ways around everything. When you surf the Net you are taking a risk, which is why we take precautions. I'm pretty sure Firefox sufficiently protected is every bit as secure as Chrome, even if it is swings & roundabouts.

Rarer than being clickjacked or an XSS attack in Chrome? I quite like the odds with Firefox. Either way, I still actually feel more secure in Firefox than Chrome.

 

I knew I was right about this.

 

Pride goeth before ...

 

LOL Yeah, I know ....

I really have noticed that ABP in Chrome doesn't block some ads that it does in Firefox or SeaMonkey though. Maybe it will improve with time.

 

This thread is breaking records. After a page of opinions, 9 or more pages of straight debate on the subject.

Nobody gives up. This-is-very-funny. I hope the mods won't interfere.

 

I think we should contact The Guinness Book of Records quickly LOL!

 

Whose winning right now ?

 

Yeah, and there are even other issues not mentioned on that site:

In Firefox I can see each individual ABP filter, edit or disable it - not so in Chrome.
In Firefox I can see the list of blockable items in ABP for each website - not so in Chrome.

I'm sure there are more differences.

And what about the Element Hiding Helper? There is one for Chrome but it obviously isn't by Wladimir Palant ...

 

Precisely. From what I have seen, most of the extensions for Chrome are just not as sophisticated, functional or often as effective as their Firefox counterparts, in fact many don't work at all or do poorly. Furthermore, it seems to me that only a handful of extensions on Chrome can sometimes diminish overall performance. You can have a great many more extensions/customisations on Firefox before it really is that noticeable in terms of performance.

LOL! My Mandarin/Cantonese just isn't up to it these days.

 

LOL, There's a race? All I have been stating for all these posts is that suitably 'extended' Firefox can be every bit as secure as Chrome. Well, that & I think that Firefox's extensions are better overall. Mind you, I'd still like to see an LCARS theme for Chrome. A lot of Chrome's themes are pretty horrible too.

 

bravo!

been surfing 'naked' for months.
surely. it must be ok?

 

You're braver than me. Although I take it you have a strategy.

The only realtime (outside of a browser) defence I have is MSE. I do have SpywareBlaster & an on-demand SUPERAntiSpyware on my notebook as well though. My desktop (Win 7 64 bit) just runs MSE. My approach is a light AV with Common-sense.exe!

 

I don't much care for this type of bravery or bravado and would certainly not advocate it.

 

what's wrong with it?

i scan all files from unknown publishers (HMP, VirusTotal, etc) before running them.
and Chrome is very well protected against exploits.
i know, i've spent hours deliberately trying to get infected with drive-by malwares.

the only way i'm gonna get infected is if i install the malware myself.
some of you folks are overly cautious about this stuff, methinks.