Monday July 1st, 2002
Linux Online recently compared the major Linux browsers, including the Mozilla-based trio of Mozilla 1.0, Netscape 6.2 and Galeon. Reviewer Michael J Jordan praises Mozilla's stability, tabbed browsing, rendering and customisation.
As mentioned by fondacio on our forums, the International Herald and Tribune took a look at Mozilla, Opera and NeoPlanet (note that the site doesn't seem to work in some builds of Mozilla). Reviewer Lee Dembart says that "Mozilla is impressive and has it all over Opera." He especially likes the ability to block pop-ups, tabbed browsing and pipelining.
UPDATE! tuxracer writes: "I've put up a browser comparison list, comparing various features that affect usability and W3C standards compliance. It compares Mozilla 1.0, Netcaptor 7.01, Internet Explorer 6.0 (Windows), and Internet Explorer 5.x (Mac)."
#54 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not my experience
Saturday July 6th, 2002 10:12 PM
You are replying to this message
"Launching an executable is a far cry from opening an email."
That's certainly true. It's also a far cry from the 'viri' that are repeatedly cited in the OE bashing quest, namely, ILOVEYOU, Melissa, and W32.Klez. All of which require the user to execute an attachment.
"A client which allows a user to be exploited by the simple act of opening an email is a dangerous and insecure tool."
Sure does sound like it. My question is: Where is it? After reading about HELP.Dropper and all of its 'if, maybes, and possiblies' who has been affected by this and where? Why hasn't this so-called dangerous beast of a thing made the charts like 'user must execute attachment' ones? All a google search turns up of 'HELP.Dropper' is a series of links quoting the same original article. Surely, a delivery mechanism that only requires a user to open an email (with scripting, activex, etc. completely disabled) would be topping the charts left and right!!
Is this the best that can be had here? I'm sure that several here, like tuxracer, are digging around like crazy to find something, anything, to justify the incessant IE/OE security bashing that takes place within the mozilla community as a sales pitch as to why I (or anyone else) should switch.
Not only can no one provide any real-world information regarding websites exploiting IE security holes to compromise a users system, the best that can be had so far is some obscure 'exploit' that sounds like the most dangerous and effective thing in the world yet is reported nowhere, other than the same initial 'report' being quoted several times over.
Some people really need to pull their heads out of the sand boxes. This whole IE/OE security thing is not as cut and dry as many here would like others to believe. Although I was never expecting to receive any nominations for a 'Mozillian of the Year' award, it has all been rather interesting, educational, and albeit, not surprising. ;)