4 ms·
On a scale of 1-10, how impressive was the Nils’ sweep of exploiting all three main browsers? I was surprised. For IE 8, I’d give him a 9 out of 10. For Saf
by trezor 17y ago
On a scale of 1-10, how impressive was the Nils’ sweep of exploiting all three main browsers?
I was surprised. For IE 8, I’d give him a 9 out of 10. For Safari, maybe a 2. It’s just too easy to pop Safari. For Firefox on Windows, I give him a 10. That was the most impressive of the three. It’s really hard to exploit Firefox on Windows.
If you are using a Mac, or anything besides Firefox on Windows, I think Microsoft's claims about security seems valid enough.
Reference: Interview with the winner of pwn2own. http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941
Edit: Ofcourse at first it seems far fetched to claim better security than Chrome, but for stupid users falling for anything a malware/phishing filter is probably a very good security feature.
- carbon8 17y ago"I think Microsoft's claims about security seems valid enough." Their claim is that it's more secure than Firefox, so according to what you quoted their claims are unquestionably invalid.
- trezor 17y agoMy point was that in a world where users click anything blindy, including "yes please downloand and install malware", security involves more than just being proof to exploits. You may not fall for such silly tricks. I know I sure don't. However my mom & dad would do so in an instant.
- SwellJoe 17y agoThat's one guy at one event. And even he says Firefox (and Chrome) on Windows is more secure than IE. And, I'm not sure I understand how IE malware/phishing protection is better than that found in Firefox. I don't doubt that it's possible, but it does seem to work in Firefox, and the angry red warning screen seems likely enough to stop someone from going ahead.