![]() |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Editor
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: இந்தியா, सिन्धु, India
Posts: 324
|
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/12...urity_bakeoff/
http://arstechnica.com/business/news...udy-claims.ars <begin rant> (Un) fortunately, the study is sponsored by Google though the testing company claims that it is "unbiased"![]() 1. The study concentrates only on Chrome, Firefox and IE. Nothing about Opera or the other browsers. 2. Nothing about other OS's? no Linux et al..... 3. They've concentrated and touted a lot about Chrome's sandbox feature and because of this it has got it's no 1 rating I think. 4. Since Firefox has no sandbox it's been pushed to no 3 (according to their study) and therefore worthless. Guess those addons like noscript, adblock plus etc.. are useless then To put it in one word "Study to make Google Chrome look really, really good" and give it even more publicity (though Google promotes it through Google pages, TV, bundling it with other programs et al) ![]() Now more and more people will tell "look forget about antivirus, patching, everything. Just use Google Chrome and you will have no problems". One of the comments in the "Best browser page" already said that..Sheesh! They should have put out something like this in bold letters during the time of press release "Although Google Chrome is very secure blah blah blah, best practices like using a limited User account, avoiding dodgy sites and downloads, regular patching/updating of programs, using a hosts file and general common sense will go a long way in keeping your system fast and safe for a better experience". </end rant> Last edited by Concerned User; 10. Dec 2011 at 07:31 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Site Manager
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South American Banana Republic, third bunch from the left
Posts: 9,250
|
Good points.
Maybe Google want this false sense of security to spread so half the planet gets infected, then get ready for the great launch of.... Google Antivirus! (not free, obviously)
__________________
Knows nothing and cares even less |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Northeast US
Posts: 422
|
I'm not buying the whole Chrome is safer because its sandboxing features thing.
Any browser can be made "safer" just by using Sandboxie with it. I still like the fact that Firefox can be customized by use of addons. LUA and Standard User accounts are still the foundation behind safer internet use for any Windows system. IE9 is safe when used in protected mode and Sandboxed with Sandboxie. Safe practices like implementing LUA and Standard Accounts have proven themselves over the years for me. LOL...MC. Google Antivirus or would still suffer from the same old weaknesses that are inherent in any antivirus or Antimalware.
__________________
T |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) | |
|
Editor
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 709
|
Quote:
But this is not the case. These users don't even care to update their virus definitions so why bother with the rest of prevention measures. Firstly you have to get infected to know what a computer VIRUS really means. You learn by experience and I have had my share few years ago... But it doesn't mean that you have to, atleast. Chrome/in general Chromium browsers strikes the right chord and strives towards achieving it, atleast by 98% and keeping you safe, making your life easier. I've pointed out a few flaws of sandboxing in Chrome in the comments sections of BF Web Browser. Those are just minor flaws. Yet, no one wants to get compromised. So I mentioned not to rely on just Chrome's security to keep you safeBarring that, Chrome's/Chromium security architecture is unrivalled. From separating browser kernel from rendering processes through sandboxing and running with Data execution prevention and ASLR as well as defining various integrity levels to Autopatching and Autoupdating, Chrome simply leads the pack with respect to base security model compared to the other Big4. Here you can find the security architecture of Chrome/Chromium. ![]() Security and Privacy are 2 different issues though. Here were some of the criticisms that Google Chrome faced, but if you had thought for a moment you would have known you have measures to opt-out of these issues 1.Unique Installation ID:There have been public outcries in the past that Google's been playing with unique client id to detect their browsing habits and packet sniffing yet no one was able to prove it. Chrome quelled the criticism by using the unique client ID only during installation henceforth ID is removed. 2.Auto-Suggest: Can be disabled. How? 3.Suggestions on navigation errors: Can be disabled. How? 4.Usage statistics and crash reports: Can be disabled . How? 5.Ad-personalization and other privacy concerns: can be opted out. How? Now you get something similar to SRWare Iron with autoupdating SRWare Iron vs Chrome
__________________
If you seek for attention, do common things in life in an uncommon way! Last edited by George.J; 10. Dec 2011 at 08:39 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 (permalink) |
|
Editor
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: இந்தியா, सिन्धु, India
Posts: 324
|
@ George J: Agreed with all your points
...Regarding, Antivirus definitions I know....People do not bother updating their AV packages or their system (I was one of them). We all learn..... Firefox's customization is still one of the best plus points for it. Google wants everyone to think that internet=google and ironically enough it is working out.Now they're working on games that will run only on Chrome ![]() http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397475,00.asp Up next: Internet works only on Google Chrome..Other browsers made obsolete
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|