Researchers Say Google Wants To Undermine Firefox’s Growth

Discussion in 'other security issues & news' started by Daveski17, Dec 26, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
  2. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
  3. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Damn! I knew someone would beat me to it. Either way, it's worth it just to use the words 'Google' & 'evil' in the same sentence. Well, that & giving Mr Bigglesworth a bit of a plug. I think he needs it now as his career seems to be in the sandbox. :D
     
  4. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Maybe this is a better follow-up.
     
  5. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    Or this? I have a feeling I read it quite some time ago.
     
  6. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    No, I doubt it.
     
  7. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    That's more like it! ;)
     
  8. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Interesting since this is what Firefox's on security devs have to say:

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=314708

    NSS Labs' response is hilarious and full of "We do studies better than Accuvant!" This was not an attack on teh study, it was them trying to say they're the better research group because Accuvants study conflicted with theirs.
     
  9. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Nice spin ... but no cigar. ;)
     
  10. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    Yep, I'm sure the Firefox devs were trying to spin the study when they agreed that its main point was accurate. Right?
     
  11. m00nbl00d

    m00nbl00d Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Posts:
    6,623
    NSS Labs is just jealous (not to saying something else :D) that Google didn't pay them. :blink:
     
  12. Hungry Man

    Hungry Man Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Posts:
    9,148
    lol and we know from past experience what happens when NSS labs gets paid...

    I read that NSS Labs thing a few days ago (posted in the other topic) and I found that while a few of their points were absolutely legitimate the bulk of it was them saying "We're the better security research company."

    They haven't. Google does use reputation though, which is separate.

    NSS Labs actually knows this and acknowledged it in another study, which makes it even funnier.
     
  13. vasa1

    vasa1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    Posts:
    4,152
    :thumb:
    But I'm not sure their paymasters gained anything positive from their "independent" studies.
     
  14. guest

    guest Guest

  15. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    Yes, that was interesting.

    "The Mozilla security team would love to block outdated plugins ... " op cit

    I don't know why the Microsoft .NET Framework plug-in isn't totally removed from Firefox; SeaMonkey-style. You (AFAIK) can't update it in Fx, so why keep it at all?
     
  16. dw426

    dw426 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2007
    Posts:
    5,543
    Is it still around? I don't have it at all in my Firefox (9).
     
  17. Baserk

    Baserk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2008
    Posts:
    1,317
    Location:
    AmstelodamUM
    ^Gone here also on FF 9.0.1.
     
  18. Daveski17

    Daveski17 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2008
    Posts:
    8,029
    Location:
    Lloegyr
    I've just checked my add-ons manager (Fx 9.0.1) & it is there right at the bottom with the Java console 6.0.30. Both are disabled by default I believe. Although sometimes when I get updates the .NET Framework Assistant claims to be 'out of date' & appears with other extensions/add-ons that need updating. This sometimes upsets my Add-On Update checker extension & I have to re-type it into the extension's 'exclusion' box in its settings. The SeaMonkey Council removed it completely. Probably a wise move. I don't know why I still have it & everyone else appears not to. Mind you, mine's the British version of Fx, maybe it's something to do with driving on the left-hand side of the road?

    EDIT: The .NET Framework Assistant appears to be absent from Fx 9.0.1 on my desktop (Win 7 64 bit) machine. Hmmmm ... curiouser & curiouser ...

    I'll have to have a butcher's hook at the portables in a bit, first I'll make a cup of tea though. ;)
     
    Last edited: Dec 27, 2011
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.