B
Bart Bailey
Crashes were rare, but I frequently stumbled over pages that failed to
load (I really mean "load", not "render")
I was referring to Gaby's mention of some sites that cause indigestion
in Opera with their javascript.
Crashes were rare, but I frequently stumbled over pages that failed to
load (I really mean "load", not "render")
Which version of Opera, pre or post v7?
7.51
which site?
I haven't found any crashers yet, but always looking.
Assuming that Mozilla based browsers will become more popular in the
future, they will obviously be targetted more frequently by the bad
boys. That doesn't change the fact that IE is *inherently* less secure
than alternative browsers and that we will very probably see fewer
problems with them.
The last case was a site about a fraudulent "strom-gewinnspiel" which I
had googled up; I couldn't even get the sitename into the history
because of the constant crashes, maybe it was
http://www.ga-online.de/inhalt/2004-07-16/ostemsol/d220933069_19704.html
== Is it the word "most" or "functional" that is confusingGabriele Neukam said:On that special day, Pop Rivet, ([email protected]) said... states.
What's that? A freudian slip towards frauded setups?
== And that's perfectly fine: You have no need for them.Not for me. I don't need no stinking ActiveX, Jscript or RealPlayer. Or
Flash.
== No such thing exists. Comment again is mindless.What if I don't want that virus/trojan capa/compatibility?
sites.I just do it. I didn't get Korgos or hijacked startpage
=== Yeah, so am I. My win98 machine is rock solid, runsI am currently writing on a PII 400 MHz with Windows 98 First Edition,
and it works just fine, with an exchanged hard drive, an additional one,
a cdrom exchanged for a dvd drive, an additional cd burner, a slightly
larger video card, an additional Realtek, and a *very* reliable intel BX
chipset. Why should I ask for more, if I don't play with realtime
shooters or driver simulations?
=== Yup, mine, too, but for what I'm using it for, it'sYes, it is a bit slow for recent RPGs, and I will replace it within the
next months.
=== So, uh, you'll believe when XP came out it was all aWhen XP is available with Service Pack2. Not sooner. When XP came out,
Bill Gates claimed that it was the most secure Windows ever made. Until
Blaster came and leveled his card house. And it didn't get any better
afterwards.
=== I don't see the connection: Is that all you thinkIf you are in favour of progress generally, are you also in favour of
better nuclear weapons? Genetically enhanced babies? Cloned politicians?
A RFID'd life from birth to bier? Or is there a moment which makes you
stop and say: I don't think that *this* "progress" will make my life
really better, after all?
=== OK, now your ignorance is showing. You need to stopa. It is way more difficult to get local authority on the machine, if
ActiveX cannot be exploited.
=== Indisputably true. But, YOU are professing thatb. The alternative browsers aren't too interesting, because they are
used by few people, and these people are a bit more safety aware than
the average John Doe user
=== Here you show your lack of familiarity with socialc. Trying to spread malware by *these* means would result in a *very*
low impact, and low impact obstructs the aimed at goal: to achieve
public attention because the programmer's "baby" managed to harm
$bigcompany.
=== You have no idea what "recent programmers" are, either.d. recent programmers aren't only kiddies that want to raise attention;
more and more of them sell their "services" (mostly installed relays and
trojans) to spammers and other internet abusers, for the *money*. A low
distribution of $malware doesn't yield high profits, so why should they
try to infect machines that browse with non-IE applications? The
default, uninformed IE user is a much easier target, and there are
zillions out there to be exploited.
=== And that proves what? Are you trying for a stereotype?Randex was created to sell the victims to a spammer. The creator
confessed that to a German student in a chat.
=== That's because you apparently migrate to the red lightWhere there is interest, there will be business. I don't want to get
caught in that kind of "business". There are by sure areas in your home
town, where you won't walk at night, if don't really have to. I see IE
as such a red light area.
Gabriele Neukam
(e-mail address removed)
Hehe... Clay, any statistics on browser usage?
No clue what it says, didn't bother to babblefish it,
Maybe it was some other site?
== Is it the word "most" or "functional" that is confusing
you? Your comment is so far out to lunch there's nothing
else to be said about it.
=== So, uh, you'll believe when XP came out it was all a
pack of lies about security, but you WILL believe, when the
same people tell you SP2 fixes it all? That's inconsistant
and paradoxical in many ways.
Besides, if 98's doing all you need, why wait for SP2 XP?
Stick with 98 if it does all you need! Or go to another OS?
You have lots of choices, so ... why XP?
=== I don't see the connection: Is that all you think
"progress" is? Why are YOU saying that ALL progress must be
"bad" or "good"?
Obviously, YOU think the progress with SP2 will make a
lied-about OS better, right?
=== OK, now your ignorance is showing. You need to stop
parroting other's thoughts and come up with some of your
own.
=== Indisputably true. But, YOU are professing that
everyone who uses IE should come over to YOUR camp!
Now, if
that were to happen, your comments would almost all become
moot.
=== Here you show your lack of familiarity with social
engineering and the human capacity.
Given equivalent
efforts, maybe even less since there are so many candidates
out there, it would quickly create many houses of cards.
It would appear that you think SP2 is solid enough to
send the vermin to the next most available suppy of food; is
that Mozilla, or which other one?
Just hang around; it will
become evident in the relatively near future, especially if
as you purport, SP2 fixes all that stuff!
*money*.
=== You have no idea what "recent programmers" are, either.
That's not what you meant! They'll accomplish those things
in the near future and I think I've gone over why enough
times now, in enough ways; 'nuff said.
=== And that proves what? Are you trying for a stereotype?
On that special day, Pop Rivet, ([email protected]) said...
[snip]
[snip]=== OK, now your ignorance is showing.
COULD YOU PLEASE FIX THE WORDWRAP OF YOU BROWSER? Thank you.
Ugh, broken lines galore.
Why did you quote my SIG? Bad move. You should really know what a sig
is. And what sarcasm is.
Did you try to run an older Win9x on a machine with > 2 GHz speed and >
512 MB of RAM. Crashes are guaranteed.
Why did you quote my SIG? Bad move. You should really know what a sig
is. And what sarcasm is.
I don't know if there is something similar in the US,
but there are one-
day-travels by bus in Germany, who will supposedly bring you to a
sightseeing place, but only for half an hour. The rest of the day you
have to stay in an inn and listen to spin doctors who are trying to sell
you cooking pot sets, magic blankets and the like, similar to home
shopping. But they don't let the bus drive home again, before a larger
amount of (way too expensive stuff) has bee ordered.
I too like to use OE and IE. Apart from the obvious security problems
and some non-compliance when it come to standards, they are good
products, and can be made safe without endless patching; provided you
understand how to configure them and the underlying OS.
On that special day, Ant, ([email protected]) said...
And provided the most recent IE update leaves your settings as they are,
and doesn't put them to defaults, according to MS's standards, which
might be different from yours. I hope it leaves them alone by now (can't
tell if it does, as in fact, I didn't specifically try it, I just
*never* use it)
Despite my high security settings, I am wary of using IE in some dark
corners of the web. In that case I use the OffByOne browser which is
small (weighing in at just over a meg), fast, and doesn't use IE dlls.
I use Mozilla with javascript on all the time, along with Proxomitron.
I like to challenge the dark corners of the web, and I follow up on
reports of dangerous urls. Never had any kind of problem yet. IMO OB1
is just too limited and awkward to use for general browsing or poking
my nose into the supposed dark and dangerous places.
BTW, I suppose you know that the Gecko based browsers are also
independent of IE's html rendering engine. I've experimented with this
by renaming mshtml.dll plus several other DLL files IE uses.
just a heads up on moz - there's a new vulnerability whereby xul is
parsed like it's the xul that defines the browser UI (and therefore
able to spoof the UI of the browser)... unlike the others recently i
have yet to hear anything about mozilla.org having (or even working on)
a fix...
I use Mozilla with javascript on all the time, along with Proxomitron.
I like to challenge the dark corners of the web, and I follow up on
reports of dangerous urls. Never had any kind of problem yet.
IMO OB1
is just too limited and awkward to use for general browsing or poking
my nose into the supposed dark and dangerous places.
BTW, I suppose you know that the Gecko based browsers are also
independent of IE's html rendering engine. I've experimented with this
by renaming mshtml.dll plus several other DLL files IE uses.
I use Mozilla with javascript on all the time, along with Proxomitron.
I like to challenge the dark corners of the web, and I follow up on
reports of dangerous urls. Never had any kind of problem yet. IMO OB1
is just too limited and awkward to use for general browsing or poking
my nose into the supposed dark and dangerous places.
BTW, I suppose you know that the Gecko based browsers are also
independent of IE's html rendering engine. I've experimented with this
by renaming mshtml.dll plus several other DLL files IE uses.
Art
http://www.epix.net/~artnpeg
Art, I have enjoyed reading your posts on malware prevention. But I must
have missed reading where you use Proxomitron. How does Proxomitron help
you?
Thanks.
(I am using Win 98FE and took your advice and did the Steve Gibson
unbinding procedure. I am a home user, dial-up.)
Hello Bob. My concern wasn't security related. My wife has
some genealogy free pages up at Geocities. Moz's ad
blocking wasn't completely doing the job. I found that
Proxo with just its default settings did do the job. The
pages come up the way they should, completely free of all
ads and banners, clean as a whistle
There are those who claim added security using Proxo or
other proxies such as Privoxy. But in particular, Proxo has
its dedicated followers and enthusiasts, as you might also
have noticed. I can't say whether or not Proxo adds any
real security. I look at it strictly as a annoyance
remover. But with certain settings, it might compensate for
javascript vulnerabilities to some extent. I just don't
know.
And speaking of annoyances, I noticed that AdAware and
Spybot started some time ago making a big deal out of
tracking cookies. To shut them up <smile> I decided to pull
the old trick from the ancient Netscape days and make my
cookies.txt file read-only after editing it down to almost
nothing. Works like a charm to keep AdAware and Spybot
complelely quiet every time I update and run them I
can't see the big deal over tracking cookies, fer
gawdssakes. I guess the authors of these utils just want to
let their users know what's going on.
-snip-
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.