5 ms·

I always used and loved Firefox because it was open source, but there have been a few articles now showing exactly how insecure Firefox is compared to Chrome. F

by Accacin 10y ago

I always used and loved Firefox because it was open source, but there have been a few articles now showing exactly how insecure Firefox is compared to Chrome. For this reason I've started to use Chrome until Firefox ups it's game.

deckiedan 10y ago
Could you share those links, please?
reitanqild 10y ago
Apologises in advance for using sarcasm and an analogy: Cars without the very very very best armour are completely unsafe. Don't use this nice, good, performant, practical and mostly bulletproof van, instead settle for the google armoured car because think if someone starts shooting at you with a 50 cal sniper rifle from a perfect angle! PS: for extra goodness the hood of the google car is welded (closed source even if we know the engine from chromium), pulling trailers (real extensions) is not possible and by default it records your every turn of the wheel and sends it to Google because you never know... PPS: Oh, at close range even the google car yields to a sniper rifle. Me: happily using Firefox. Happily driving a reasonable family car. There are certain places I won't drive that car at night but I can live with that. (Feel free to bookmark and reuse. : )
- sigmar 10y ago
  You could have saved yourself some typing by just writing "risk assessment." Also- I think you vastly underestimate how often people get hacked through their browser.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    Also- I think you vastly underestimate how often people get hacked through their browser. As a seasoned IT pro I should know. Yet in the last 20 years I was hit by a drive by exploit once. Other people: tons of times. By some weird coincidence this seems to be the same people who insist on trying to run the latest crack of Photoshop etc. I do explain to people that just as there are certain places you won't go at night there are certain places they shouldn't necessarily visit on the Internet. Other than that it is tech support scams, driver update scams etc, but not many drive by exploits on places I frequent (HN, occacionally dzone, reddit and slashdot, technical blogs, mainstream and not so mainstream (both very correct and somewhat uncorrect ones) news in my language etc.
- Accacin 10y ago
  I mean your whole argument falls apart when you take into account the fact that cars cost money and the president or PM's car is going to cost a lot more than your average car. Browsers are free. > pulling trailers (real extensions) Well look what's happening to Firefox's extensions soon. > PPS: Oh, at close range even the google car yields to a sniper rifle. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/pwn2own-2017-microsoft-edge-hacked,33940.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/pwn2own-2017-microsoft-edge... - Although the statement "Firefox was back at this year’s Pwn2Own after missing last year, seemingly because the browser would’ve been too easy to hack" probably sums it up nicely.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    I mean your whole argument falls apart when you take into account the fact that cars cost money and the president or PM's car is going to cost a lot more than your average car. Browsers are free. Using Chrome would cost me a lot. Both because it is sub-par for my usage patterns and because it feels bad to support it. Well look what's happening to Firefox's extensions soon. Last I checked whey will still be miles ahead of every other browser. "Firefox was back at this year’s Pwn2Own after missing last year, seemingly because the browser would’ve been too easy to hack" probably sums it up nicely. Pwn2own is the equivalent of lining up cars and inviting people to bring their preferred weapon to test the armour. As I have pointed out elsewhere either I am unusually lucky or drive-by exploits are way less common in the wild than people think. Or maybe it is just because I don't go hunting for Photoshop cracks and free movies with my work browser. In any case: Yes, the safer the better, but we need to stop this "nothing but the most secure" mindset because in the end it only results in a Chrome monoculture which I think is worse in every way, even securitywise.
    - Accacin 10y ago
      > Using Chrome would cost me a lot. Both because it is sub-par for my usage patterns and because it feels bad to support it. Doesn't change the fact that your analogy is flawed. > Last I checked whey will still be miles ahead of every other browser. Vimperator maybe, but that stopped working a while back. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozilla-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like-extensions/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil... Still, they're moving. And why do you think they're moving? > Pwn2own is the equivalent of lining up cars and inviting people to bring their preferred weapon to test the armour. I agree with you, but I was responding to your comment about a sniper rifle. I'd argue that pwn2own is the equivalent of using a sniper rifle - and Chrome seems to have dealt with it well. > In any case: Yes, the safer the better, but we need to stop this "nothing but the most secure" mindset because in the end it only results in a Chrome monoculture which I think is worse in every way, even securitywise. Like I said, I'd been using Firefox for years because I honestly think it's a better browser. That doesn't excuse how far behind they are security wise though. They seem to have the resources with the companies they've been acquiring but IMO they (the resources) are misplaced. I much prefer open source, and on my home Arch Machine I use Chromium but at work I'm required to use Windows so I use Chrome because otherwise it's awkward. Once Mozilla gets sandboxing implemented I will be moving back to Firefox.

by Accacin 10y ago

deckiedan 10y ago

Could you share those links, please?

reitanqild 10y ago

Apologises in advance for using sarcasm and an analogy: Cars without the very very very best armour are completely unsafe. Don't use this nice, good, performant, practical and mostly bulletproof van, instead settle for the google armoured car because think if someone starts shooting at you with a 50 cal sniper rifle from a perfect angle! PS: for extra goodness the hood of the google car is welded (closed source even if we know the engine from chromium), pulling trailers (real extensions) is not possible and by default it records your every turn of the wheel and sends it to Google because you never know... PPS: Oh, at close range even the google car yields to a sniper rifle. Me: happily using Firefox. Happily driving a reasonable family car. There are certain places I won't drive that car at night but I can live with that. (Feel free to bookmark and reuse. : )

sigmar 10y ago
You could have saved yourself some typing by just writing "risk assessment." Also- I think you vastly underestimate how often people get hacked through their browser.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  Also- I think you vastly underestimate how often people get hacked through their browser. As a seasoned IT pro I should know. Yet in the last 20 years I was hit by a drive by exploit once. Other people: tons of times. By some weird coincidence this seems to be the same people who insist on trying to run the latest crack of Photoshop etc. I do explain to people that just as there are certain places you won't go at night there are certain places they shouldn't necessarily visit on the Internet. Other than that it is tech support scams, driver update scams etc, but not many drive by exploits on places I frequent (HN, occacionally dzone, reddit and slashdot, technical blogs, mainstream and not so mainstream (both very correct and somewhat uncorrect ones) news in my language etc.
Accacin 10y ago
I mean your whole argument falls apart when you take into account the fact that cars cost money and the president or PM's car is going to cost a lot more than your average car. Browsers are free. > pulling trailers (real extensions) Well look what's happening to Firefox's extensions soon. > PPS: Oh, at close range even the google car yields to a sniper rifle. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/pwn2own-2017-microsoft-edge-hacked,33940.html http://www.tomshardware.com/news/pwn2own-2017-microsoft-edge... - Although the statement "Firefox was back at this year’s Pwn2Own after missing last year, seemingly because the browser would’ve been too easy to hack" probably sums it up nicely.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  I mean your whole argument falls apart when you take into account the fact that cars cost money and the president or PM's car is going to cost a lot more than your average car. Browsers are free. Using Chrome would cost me a lot. Both because it is sub-par for my usage patterns and because it feels bad to support it. Well look what's happening to Firefox's extensions soon. Last I checked whey will still be miles ahead of every other browser. "Firefox was back at this year’s Pwn2Own after missing last year, seemingly because the browser would’ve been too easy to hack" probably sums it up nicely. Pwn2own is the equivalent of lining up cars and inviting people to bring their preferred weapon to test the armour. As I have pointed out elsewhere either I am unusually lucky or drive-by exploits are way less common in the wild than people think. Or maybe it is just because I don't go hunting for Photoshop cracks and free movies with my work browser. In any case: Yes, the safer the better, but we need to stop this "nothing but the most secure" mindset because in the end it only results in a Chrome monoculture which I think is worse in every way, even securitywise.
  - Accacin 10y ago
    > Using Chrome would cost me a lot. Both because it is sub-par for my usage patterns and because it feels bad to support it. Doesn't change the fact that your analogy is flawed. > Last I checked whey will still be miles ahead of every other browser. Vimperator maybe, but that stopped working a while back. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozilla-sets-plan-to-dump-firefox-add-ons-move-to-chrome-like-extensions/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/08/mozil... Still, they're moving. And why do you think they're moving? > Pwn2own is the equivalent of lining up cars and inviting people to bring their preferred weapon to test the armour. I agree with you, but I was responding to your comment about a sniper rifle. I'd argue that pwn2own is the equivalent of using a sniper rifle - and Chrome seems to have dealt with it well. > In any case: Yes, the safer the better, but we need to stop this "nothing but the most secure" mindset because in the end it only results in a Chrome monoculture which I think is worse in every way, even securitywise. Like I said, I'd been using Firefox for years because I honestly think it's a better browser. That doesn't excuse how far behind they are security wise though. They seem to have the resources with the companies they've been acquiring but IMO they (the resources) are misplaced. I much prefer open source, and on my home Arch Machine I use Chromium but at work I'm required to use Windows so I use Chrome because otherwise it's awkward. Once Mozilla gets sandboxing implemented I will be moving back to Firefox.