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)."
#84 Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not my exp
Sunday July 7th, 2002 10:55 PM
You are replying to this message
How then did your system get infected? Did you or anyone you know get NIMDA? Here's how NIMDA worked:
1. from client to client via email 2. from client to client via open network shares 3. from web server to client via browsing of compromised web sites 4. from client to web server via active scanning for and exploitation of various Microsoft IIS 4.0 / 5.0 directory traversal vulnerabilities (VU#111677 and CA-2001-12) 5. from client to web server via scanning for the back doors left behind by the "Code Red II" (IN-2001-09), and "sadmind/IIS" (CA-2001-11) worms <http://www.cert.org/body/…es/CA200126_FA200126.html>
NIMDA, one of the costliest and most widespread worms in the history of MS Windows computing (more than 1.2 million infections in the first couple weeks it existed with as many as 120,000 infections in a single day <http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1105-273420.html-> that sounds considerably more widespread than the 42 thousand fatality car wrecks in all of that year), didn't require any user execution. If you got it you probably got it by simply opening an email message or browsing a web page. That Microsoft offered patches to IE/Outlook to defend against this massive attack is an admission of inadequate security in their vulnerable applications. I didn't get infected by NIMDA while a good portion of my friends and family did. I attribute that to not using applications with inadequate security. Do you have confidence that there are not going to be additional attacks on MS products of this scale or larger? I don't. All of the major anti-virus software packages defend against NIMDA. I'm of the opinion, however, that a user shouldn't have to pay extra money and install extra software because of an inadequate email or web browsing application.