Slashdot Mirror


Firefox 2.0 Update To Remove Phishing Detection

An anonymous reader writes "Computerworld and others are reporting that Firefox 2.0.0.19, the last security update to be released before 2.0 goes end-of-life, will remove the phishing detection at the request of Google. The browser is using an older version of the Safe Browsing protocol that Google will discontinue. According to the latest NetApplications report, about 25% of all Firefox users were still on version 2.0. This move ought to result in an increased adoption of Firefox 3.0 and other browsers, unless it goes unnoticed by most users."

5 of 351 comments (clear)

  1. A security update that reduces security by mysidia · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Hrm.. I don't think that's the intended use of security updates that causes users to be willing to accept and enable such updates.

    In a way, it's a breach of trust if they were intentionally holding back on upgrading to 3.0. Users would be in slightly better shape if they refused to accept this update (at least until Google finally does turn it off).

    I anticipate not necessarily a massive increase in users updating to Firefox 3.0, but more likely a massive increase in phishing targetting 2.0 users who still think they're protected (they didn't pay attention to the update release notes).

    1. Re:A security update that reduces security by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I still don't see why they're pushing people so hard to upgrade to 3.0.

      Because they are going to stop working on that version. I hate to point out the obvious, but this isn't really a complicated question.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  2. Will anyone notice? by drew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm fairly certain that anyone who actually needs phishing detection probably won't even notice that it's gone, or won't know what it means. For example, people like my parents who only have Firefox because some well meaning geek installed it for them a year and a half ago...

    --
    If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  3. Re:Why would anyone use FF2? by i.of.the.storm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not sure what's so bleeding-edge about FF 3, it's a lot more stable and faster than Firefox 2 was. I think your word choice is a bit disingenuous and designed to make FF 3 look bad. And the situation is a bit different since upgrading from XP to Vista costs money, whereas unless you're on Windows 98 upgrading from Firefox 2 to 3 doesn't cost a thing.

    --
    All your base are belong to Wii.
  4. People on older distros by sentientbrendan · · Score: 5, Informative

    can't upgrade.

    On Linux Firefox doesn't distribute RPM's or DEB's for the various major platforms, and most vendor's don't provide new software for distros once they've been released.

    Also, getting firefox 3 compiled from source on older distros is incredibly difficult due to version skew of various libraries. I got most of the way there, and gave up.

    People who use linux for work are often stuck on older distros due to long corporate maintanance cycle's. It costs them a lot of money to roll out a major update to thousands of machines, especially if you are developing software on top of them.

    Thus, it really sucks that there is no way to put newer software on older linux OS's without running into library version hell. Especially since this is so easy on other platforms. After all, who has trouble getting software working on XP?