Slashdot Mirror
Google Chrome Most Resilient Against Attacks, Researchers Find (helpnetsecurity.com)
Between Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, and Internet Explorer, Chrome has been found to be the most resilient against attacks, an analysis by security researchers has found. Firefox, Safari, and Opera were not included in the test. From a report: "Modern web browsers such as Chrome or Edge improved security in recent years. Exploitation of vulnerabilities is certainly more complex today and requires a higher skill than in the past. However, the attack surface of modern web browsers is increasing due to new technologies and the increasing complexity of web browsers themselves," noted Markus Vervier, Managing Director of German IT security outfit X41 D-Sec (and one of the researchers involved in the analysis). The researchers' aim was to determine which browser provides the highest level of security in common enterprise usage scenarios.
Chrome to the slow kid and his autistic older brother.
sudo rm -r -f --no-preserve-root /
Seriously, what is the point of this unless it compares Chrome to Firefox. Those are the only ones that actually matter!
Remember when we were told by guys like Tim O'Reilly and Eric Raymond that Open Source was the "best" way to do software development? Well surprise surprise it turns out that that was only true when software was simple enough to be done by amateurs. It is really interesting to see the accelerating shift away from "open" development in almost every major field. I have spoken to dozens of new grads in top schools and almost all of them see open source as not only "not important" but in the words of a couple of them "irrelevant".
Google Chrome More Resilient Than Microsoft Edge and Internet Explorer Against Attacks, Lazy Researchers Find.
We compared Chrome to one of the most reviled web browsers in the world for poor security and discovered it came out on top! You won't believe what happened next - click here!
Chrome is a pillar of Googles strategy against Apple, Facebook and MicroSoft. They'd be stupid to let things slide with Chrome.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
So you are saying that that a rabbit, who must eat his own poop to survive, was not a mistake?
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Then the test is half-assed and not worth reading.
There's an important paragraph in the introduction:
You can read the paper yourself to determine whether they succeeded at avoiding biasing their results. One up-front question is why they didn't include Firefox. Based on public vulnerabilities and Pwn2Own and similar competitions, FF is less secure than Chrome, but often better than Edge. Safari tends to trail by a large margin, so its exclusion doesn't surprise me, nor does the exclusion of Opera and other browsers with very small market share.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
...surrender all there personal info to google, I can see how this can be so.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
That's like comparing a pile of shit and a bucket of shit to a rose. which one will smell better?
If you gave me a choice between a printer and a giraffe with explosive diarrhoea, i'll get my ladder and my raincoat
Link to actual research:
https://browser-security.x41-dsec.de/X41-Browser-Security-White-Paper.pdf
because Slashdot editors are lazy. More seriously, this paper appears to be a must-read if you're responsible for desktop or other end-user security. (The examples are great.)
Just the orher day i was on a websight where an advertisment from adsense started to refesh in a way that eventually caused the google helper process to consume all available memory. This also happened for firefox and edge, so chrome wasnt alone. The ad appeared to be for a fake news sight. Seems like they all still have work to do.
Your attitude is a perfect example of why Firefox is on its way out. If you knew anything about Firefox 57 you'd know that it could very well be the final nail in Firefox's coffin. You would not be recommending that users look forward to it!
Firefox 57 is due in November, and it's the first release that's supposed to only support WebExtensions extensions. This will very likely break many existing extensions. Due to differing capabilities between the existing extension model and WebExtensions it may not even be possible to reimplement some existing extensions!
So I think we'll see two things happen:
1) A small number of Firefox users will continue to use pre-57 versions, so they can continue to use extensions that won't be or can't be supported in Firefox 57 and beyond.
2) A much larger number of Firefox users will move to Chrome (or Chromium) and never look back. If all of their extensions use a Chrome-like model, there's no reason to use Firefox. In my experience, and that of many other people, Firefox is very slow, bloated, and memory-hungry compared to Chrome. I'm sure you'll parade some bullshit "benchmarks" showing otherwise, but these benchmarks don't correspond at all to the actual experience of using Firefox and feeling just how less responsive it is than Chrome.
Firefox's market share is already pretty pathetic. Firefox 54 has only 2.94% of the market. Firefox 55 has only 1.19%. Firefox 52 has 0.49%. The rest of Firefox's releases, including Firefox for Android, are well under 1%. Many of them are in the 0.01% to 0.05% range.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if Firefox 57 knocks Firefox down to the 1% to 2% range.
Firefox is already pretty irrelevant now that's down to about 5%. When it's down to the lowest of the low single-digit percentages, the chance of a recovery will basically become non-existent. And once the Yahoo search deal expires, it's doubtful that any other organization will want to sign a search deal with Mozilla. Why would they, if Firefox has only 1% or maybe 2% of the market at that time? Firefox's future will be even bleaker than it already is if Mozilla were to lose out on their main source of income.
You hype Firefox 57 as if it's a good thing. The evidence suggests otherwise. It shows that Firefox 57 has the potential to be the most disastrous release in Firefox's history, even worse than the early rapid-release extension breakage debacle and even worse than the Australis debacle.
It literally synchronizes malicious adware and malware extensions across multiple devices automatically. They're doing nothing about bad plugins and extensions either and that is what affects the majority of end users. So it's basically the least secure.
Our IT dept. is constantly removing rogue PDF extensions that hijack a ton of functionality, as well as MacKeeper, and Genio adware off of laptops of users that use Chrome. Firefox users have dramatically less issues with these things. I know some of this is attributable to user error, but the rogue extensions on Chrome have got to go.
It is ok APK gays aren't the problem.
The problem is APK's undying love of moose dick
Challenge Accepted!
You really shouldn't mock creimer and APK like that. I know they are bad but comparing them to Edge and IE respectively just seems cruel even for them.
Pointless advert disguised as research. Did RTFA. Lost my time. Without including other browsers and OSes this has little value.
TLDR ->Management Summary->"I'm gay as a goose but so far in back of the closet I can see Narnia"
This research is useless because they only compared it to Edge and IE. Of course it was better. All browsers are better than those 2. Furthermore, the study was sponsored by Google, which explains why it's so Chrome positive. https://www.x41-dsec.de/securi...
Shame Firefox can't rip off this feature/design aspect too.
There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
On the front page of their "security" website is an insightful article saying that the weakest links in infused are weak passwords and negligent employees.
Did you know that? Did you?
It's earth shattering news.
I feel it should be noted that they separated Thunderbird and Lightning into two separate entries in the survey. For those unaware, the calendar plugin for Thunderbird is Lightning. Therefore, they should be counted as one. Doing so would make them the winner hands down. Unfortunately, since the separated them, Gnome-Calendar was the winner.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
R kelly: Tom cruise please come out of the closet
Tom cruise: why don't you come in the closet?
R kelly: now I'm in the closetttttttt
google cannot allow others to get access to the data they are harvesting about you, then they would lose their edge. makes sense they might have tried a little harder than mozillderp.