While I agree completely with the "nothing is 100% secure" paradigma, I still see a big difference between IE and FF.
AFAIK, IE security paradigma is based on relying in the user to choose it's own "level" of protection (ie. Discretional Access). Sure, you can use "group policies" or even the IEAK to minimize the risk of the user screwing it self by placing a malicious web site in the wrong IE security zone... but this implies the use of whatever resources are necessary.
OTH, FF has a "build in" security design that offers a much robust approach to protect the user from Internet's risks.
Is not this somewhat (very loosely, though) equivalent to the "Orange Book" classification for Computer systems???
Just my two cents...
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree completely with the "nothing is 100% secure" paradigma, I still see a big difference between IE and FF. AFAIK, IE security paradigma is based on relying in the user to choose it's own "level" of protection (ie. Discretional Access). Sure, you can use "group policies" or even the IEAK to minimize the risk of the user screwing it self by placing a malicious web site in the wrong IE security zone ... but this implies the use of whatever resources are necessary.
OTH, FF has a "build in" security design that offers a much robust approach to protect the user from Internet's risks.
Is not this somewhat (very loosely, though) equivalent to the "Orange Book" classification for Computer systems???
Just my two cents ...