Most Insecure Browser?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I belive this company is placing F.U.D. out there to sell it's solutions.

Why try to sell a solution when Firefox is secure? So swat it down from it's lofty perch with this "report", then start selling "solutions" to businesses.

Pure spin, zero truth.

I do NOT make return calls to PC's when Firefox is
A) installed and used 100% of the time
B) Firefox is updated as updates are released
C) Kids don't use Limewire or other file sharing services which are detrimental to the health of the PC's as clueless kids download all that stuff.
 
I have seen trojan horse programs download to the newest version of Firefox. That version of Firefox, fully updated and equipped with the NoScript add-on, failed to protect the computer from those trojan horse programs. Limewire and file sharing services were not being used on this computer.

I saw this with my own eyes. I don't work for Microsoft. And I want to use Firefox when I go to areas of the internet where I have not been before.

In addition an add-on for Firefox (Vietnamese Language Pack add-on) contained scumware. No one is saying that the developer of that software deliberately put the scumware there. But it got there somehow. Makes no difference how.

When I suggested in the past that scumware might get into open source software I was attacked in a very mean spirited way at this website. Well, it happened. And it can happen again.
 
Originally Posted By: Mystic
When I suggested in the past that scumware might get into open source software I was attacked in a very mean spirited way at this website. Well, it happened. And it can happen again.


Do you recall how the situation was resolved? Normally, in an open source environment, anything like that that happens is dealt with immediately and transparently; a thousand pairs of eyes in the heads of people who take a vulnerability or compromise fairly personally, looking at the same problem.

Open source folks tout that as an *advantage*: It is not that anything is ever immune to malicious or scummy business being weaseled into a program's installation; it is that 1) The odds of one of the good guys seeing these vulnerabilities first and fixing it before it ever becomes a problem is more likely than one of the few 9-to-5'ers working on a for-profit, closed source project doing the same. 2) Most often, for-profit, closed source companies do not disclose information regarding vulnerabilitries or malicious goings-on, and when and if they do, you might be lucky enough to see a fix on "patch Tuesday".

This needs to be made as clear as clear can be: inserting malicious code into open source software is very literally the easiest thing in the world a hacker can do. The source code for any given program is freely available, and you can modify as you see fit and you can legally redistribute the software. You could, assuming you had the programming chops and the questionable morals do to so, get the source code for OpenOffice, insert code in it that orders a thousand pizzas to the home of the user every time it starts, and post it for download on your web site. Does this make OpenOffice unsafe? This is the reason why you should only download open source software from the project's home page instead of from The Pirate Bay! It is *so* flippin' easy to write a malicious bot program in Python and post it as part of "Ubuntu-9.10" on a torrent site!

You are correct, Mystic, and the others who point out the whole Vietnamese language thing on the Firefox add-on site: That is some scary stuff when, though *official* channels, you end up getting snookered. (Sony rootkit, anyone?) Anyone who disputes that scumware finds its way into open source software is mistaken, has misunderstood you, or is a fanboi/ zealot unwilling to accept the notion that the open source software development and distribution model is imperfect.
 
I visit only clean, decent websites, I don't use pirated software, and I don't use file sharing websites either. I try to use common sense on the internet, and I have security software and keep my computer updated. So it seems to me that I should not be much of a target. But I have discovered that even a person such as me faces many dangers on the internet. Has the internet gone so dark that people cannot safely use it?

Thank you for your support about potential dangers in open source software. But of course the Sony rootkit is a good example also of potential dangers in closed software development. Everybody was just lucky that a smart guy stumpled across this rootkit.

Maybe instead of silly personal attacks on each other people at this website can engage in interesting discussions about all kinds of different things.

I do suggest that if a person thinks a computer is clean of scumware be sure to do a really good scan. I believe in A-Squared (there is a free version) which may have some false positives but according to some studies has a very high detection rate. I suggest the free version of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware. And I suggest running this software in Safemode on a Windows computer. Also, run Kaspersky in from the CD in Safemode. Kaspersky uses an alternative operating system (a version of Linux) which cannot be affected by the malware and can mount the Windows operating system. Some of the bad guys use the same methods. The Sophos rootkit would be a good idea also. See if that computer is really clean.
 
Last edited:
So, when surfing the web, don't rely on the browser "only".
My AV program has stopped everything regardless of whether I was using IE, Firefox, Opera, Safari.... or whatever. Actually, I don't expect my browser to protect me, just like I don't expect the Windows OS to protect me. Combination of everything + fingers crossed = no problems here.
 
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: tmorris1

I agree, but unfortunately many programs, especially games, don't even run without admin rights.


My wife, a high school teacher, uses some school board supplied report card and class management programs that actually *keep the user configuration data* in C:\Program Files\$program_name! As I understand it, many games do this, too... It's such a bad decision, with so many pitfalls and no real benefits that I can see; and I wonder why on earth software makers continue to do this.

I try to make a practice of sending companies that make software that keeps config or user data in locations other than user space (or otherwise requires admin rights to run it) a long lecture via email; and their responses, not counting the dismissive form responses I get from 75% of them, all harken back to a backward-compatibility excuse: They've been making this software and licensing it to the board since 199x, and to modify user permissions, config file locations and such-and-such would bugger up the whole thing. (Translation: We're too lazy to re-write the program the way it shoulda been done in the first place. We'd rather burden a school's IT person.)

When setting up a WinXP system, I used to rename the Administrator account to "NoNetwork" or something to that effect; hoping that intruders would not opt to try to get into that (seemingly useless) account, and bots would not bother with it. I would then create an "Administrator" account with *zero* priviledges and an absurdly long password; hoping that the decline in morale after hacking into a fake account would drive script kiddies to greener pastures. The users would run the system under their user account with normal user priviledges. (Games and report card programs not withstanding!) My hope was that with proper backups, even if a hacker wiped the whole account, the OS would remain untouched, or at least reparable, and a quick restore of the user's data would put us right back in the ring.


No arguments and all good suggestions.

However, there is nothing that prevents one from changing the rights of report card programs and their directories so normal users can run them.

I've run into this installing games in my children's computers, and I'd say 90% of the time, setting the permissions in those directories is all that is needed to make the program work.

If it's going to read and write there, just give users rw access and call it a day. Then don't run the games as admin.

Of course, you have to know how to set access rights in Windows, but once you get past that, I find its livable.

I'd rather do that than allow the kids admin access to the computer.
 
I would say the most unsecure would be the most used. These would be Windows based programs. People with bad intentions are going to target the biggest players to get the most bang for the buck and best chance at success. Since Windows I.E and Windows O.S"s are by far the leader it makes since that they will be hammered the hardest.

There is no way to make a totally secure product when you surf the Net and go to websites, download programs etc.
 
FireFox has never given me issues. I also use addons such as No-Script & Ad Block.

IE has the easiest transport method for hijackings etc. If you surf smart and protect your self then you should have no issues.

If you goto the great unknown and protect yourself, you should be ok.

When you enter the unknown with no idea of what your doing then you will encounter issues regardless of browser preference.
 
I guess OSS software distribution model is dangerous if you choose to download software from untrusted sites and not bother to use MD5 checksums provided by the software's authors. Of course this is true about closed source software, as also noted. This is a danger from not obtaining software prudently, not from the method the software was developed. A specious argument against OSS at best.
 
Last edited:
I don't trust the American antivirus programs unDummy. I prefer Kaspersky or NOD32. Also, with Vista and Windows 7 a person should use a standard account and not the administrator account. Same thing with the Mac although few Mac users probably use a standard account for themselves (maybe their children). I am not as familiar with Linux but surely it would be a good idea with Linux to not use the root account or superuser account either.

I am a fairly strong believer in A-Squared. I also like to run anti-malware programs in Safe Mode from time to time.

I used to believe very much in Linux servers. I had an ISP in the past where Linux computers were used. The guy who ran the ISP was super sharp. A guy who works in IT where I work was amazed how tight the security was for my (home) email account. He tried to email me and verification was required to make sure that an actual person and not an automated program sent the email. But the Linux computers need to be setup by somebody who actually knows what they are doing and obviously this is not happening if the most attacked type of servers are Linux servers. This is a security hole that needs to be taken care of.

I think that there is a serious threat to the home websites of people who develop add-ons for Firefox. After all, if an add-on is accepted that add-on will probably be used by thousands of people using Firefox web browsers. Perhaps this is a new target area for the bad guys. In my opinion, this is an area where there needs to be a lot of security. It happened once, and it can happen again. I was attacked when I suggested that something like this could happen to open source software. Well, it happened. But I don't feel good that I was proven right. People were affected by all of this. We need to make sure it does not happen again.

People who develop open source software need to be aware of the threats that may develop to their own websites, in the distribution of open source software, etc.

I said it before and I will say it again. A lot of code development, and very little checking of code.
 
Just one other thing. The Vietnamese Language Pack add-on was fully accepted by the Mozilla people. That is my understanding. It was not software from an 'untrusted' source. Somebody somewhere was able to get scumware in. Maybe they attacked the website of the software developer. Or maybe they somehow got their scumware in while the software was being distributed. The langauge pack was a Firefox add-on.

There are lots of websites of people who develop these add-ons and lots of Firefox add-ons. In view of the fact that potentially many thousands of computers could get infected, would it not be clever to try to put scumware in add-ons? Maybe somebody needs to take a good look at all of this. If they don't check it out and if several add-ons for Firefox wind up with scumware, what happens to the reputation of Firefox? What happens to the reputation of open source software?
 
Originally Posted By: Mystic
But the Linux computers need to be setup by somebody who actually knows what they are doing and obviously this is not happening if the most attacked type of servers are Linux servers. This is a security hole that needs to be taken care of.


I have been using Linux servers (from a number of distributions) since the mid-90's. We're talking 1000-2000 machines over the last 15 years or so. I have never had a machine compromised. Not one. Security is as tight as the person who configures it. That goes for any OS. Google seems to be quite comfy with Linux and has an estimated 1 million+ servers spread out over more than a dozen datacenters across the globe.

Best,
 
Quote:

I said it before and I will say it again. A lot of code development, and very little checking of code.

Odd you would mention the Firefox exploit since it only impacts Windows.

Code is peer reviewed, as much as you would like to believe it, Iranians aren't putting malicious code into the linux kernel (as you have suggested they can)

Many commericial firewall products are built from Linux/OpenBSD/FreeBSD/NetBSD. None are built on Windows. Perhaps you might suggest that companies are @ risk by running a linux based firewall and they ought to move to Windows....
 
Last edited:
I am not going to get into a silly argument with you. You are obviously a very committed Linux fan. You are ready to attack me whenever you feel I say something negative about Linux. If I say something positive about Linux (and I have) you seem to fail to notice.

Is Firefox open source software or not? Simple question. The Firefox is being used on Windows computers but it is open source software. Somebody put scumware in a Firefox add-on. End of story.

I was attacked here by various people when I suggested that scumware could potentially be put into open source software. It happened. End of story.

It can happen to closed source software also. The Sony rootkit?

Is my suggestion that the Mozilla people need to really check potential add-ons for Firefox bad advice? What advice would you give them? Would you tell them they don't need to check add-ons carefully after the Vietnamese Language Pack incident?

Computer operating systems are just technology. I like computer hardware and software. No matter what operating sytem you care to talk about (Linux, Windows, Mac, Unix, BSD) it is just technology. All the technology we have today will be forgotten at some time in the future. There will be better technology replacing what we use today. Compare Windows 3.1 to Windows 7. Compare Mac OS 10.0 to 10.6. Someday Windows 7 will be like Windows 3.1. Someday Mac 10.6 will be like Mac 10.0. There may be computer technology in the future that makes everything we have today (Linux, Windows, Mac, Unix, BSD) look like a caveman's spear. I am not going to get that worked up about it. There are more important things in my life.
 
IE6 is the most dangerous internet application in ever.

Firefox with the AdBlock Plus add-on lets maybe one or two ad tracking cookies a month through on my system. That's it. No viruses, no trojans, no rootkits, no nothing. I never have a problem. When I bought my desktop it was so badly infected it could barely hit the Windows desktop. 9 hours of decrudifying and virus removal and restarting about twenty times finally fixed it up. FF with ABP has KEPT it clean since.
 
Nobody should be using IE6. IE8 can be downloaded even on Windows XP computers. It is unfair to judge an old web browser like IE6 against more modrn web browsers. How about IE8 compared to Firefox?

Based on my own experience with Firefox I would highly recommend setting the cache to ZERO! And in today's world you need to use the best antivirus program and antispyware program you can find.

By the way, cookie technology has changed somewhat. Flash technology is now being used with cookies so that they cannot be removed so easily.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top