Chrome 63 Offers Even More Protection From Malicious Sites, Using Even More Memory (arstechnica.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: To further increase its enterprise appeal, Chrome 63 -- which hit the browser's stable release channel yesterday -- includes a couple of new security enhancements aimed particularly at the corporate market. The first of these is site isolation, an even stricter version of the multiple process model that Chrome has used since its introduction. Chrome uses multiple processes for several security and stability reasons. On the stability front, the model means that even if a single tab crashes, other tabs (and the browser itself) are unaffected. On the security front, the use of multiple processes makes it much harder for malicious code from one site to steal secrets (such as passwords typed into forms) of another. [...]

Naturally, this greater use of multiple processes incurs a price; with this option enabled, Chrome's already high memory usage can go up by another 15 to 20 percent. As such, it's not enabled by default; instead, it's intended for use by enterprise users that are particularly concerned about organizational security. The other new capability is the ability for administrators to block extensions depending on the features those extensions need to use. For example, an admin can block any extension that tries to use file system access, that reads or writes the clipboard, or that accesses the webcam or microphone. Additionally, Google has started to deploy TLS 1.3, the latest version of Transport Layer Security, the protocol that enables secure communication between a browser and a Web server. In Chrome 63, this is only enabled between Chrome and Gmail; in 2018, it'll be turned on more widely.

Comments

Chrome 63's memory usage is lower than Firefox 57

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been using Chrome 63 and I've found its memory usage to be much lower than Firefox 57's.

I find that Chrome 63 performs a lot better than Firefox 57 does, too. This is strange, because Firefox 57 is supposed to be faster, from what I've been hearing, but I really didn't notice any difference.

What I did notice is that Firefox 57 broke nearly all of my extensions! Some of them I can't even replace, because the authors have given up and aren't bothering to port them to Firefox 57, or worse, they can't even port them because WebExtensions is too crippled.

I started evaluating Chrome after Firefox 57 broke my extensions, and I think I'll be sticking with Chrome. I find it so much faster, and I find it uses less memory. Firefox's extensions used to be a big win for it, but now that those are gone I find that Firefox has no advantage over Chrome, and really all it has now is a lot of disadvantages.

Re:Patronizing Douche Nozzles!

[sims 2]

I jumped to chrome when it was released because it was much faster at the time. At the time it meant giving up a lot of things that I used all the time like adblocking and a lot of site compatibility.

Then there was firefox's memory leaks.

Stuff worked with firefox not so much with chrome.

Today there's not nearly as much of a difference in speed but there's not really much reason for me to switch back either I don't like what firefox has become but I still miss a few of the addons.