It's not just IE, then?

[Kov-Ice]

Saw THIS article today. IE doesn't have the market cornered on vulnerabilities, then. The lion's share, no doubt, just not all.

[EzyStvy]

As more and more people move away from IE, so will the hackers

[Kov-Ice]

Interesting to note in the article that IE has dropped under 90% usage for the first time in a decade. Mozilla reports over 10 million downloads of their browser.

[digitalfreedom64]

Well the way I look at it just about any program that has to connect to the internet poses a security risk. Be it a Web browser, instant messenger, or mediaplayer. There's no way to make a totally secure webbrowser.

[patrickt]

Of course, number of downloads does not equate to number of users. I've downloaded Firefox three times, used it awhile, and gone back to IE. I doubt I'm the only one to have done that.

[Markoman01027]

Although, IE does have vulnerabilities. I still believe that it's not the program, but rather the user who is operating it. If you browse safe websites, stay well protected, and keep all programs updated(including Microsoft Updates) then you should be fine. No need to switch to Firefox.

I bet you anything that 10 million mark is mostly consisted of people who know nothing about security, and only switched to Firefox because they dont have the common sense to be properly secured with IE. Every program will have vulnerabilities, but it's up to the user to to have common sense on how to stay protected. Dont blame everything on IE.

[digitalfreedom64]

Originally Posted by patrickt Of course, number of downloads does not equate to number of users. I've downloaded Firefox three times, used it awhile, and gone back to IE. I doubt I'm the only one to have done that.

This is true, but it's probly a pretty good estimate though because most people are sick of IE and microsoft themselves said that there would be now more major upgrades to IE until the release of longhorn. While other browsers like firefox and netscape constantly have new features and to me are more usful than IE. But as I said there is no such thing as a perfctly secure web browser.

[digitalfreedom64]

Originally Posted by crashoverride This is true, but it's probly a pretty good estimate though because most people are sick of IE and microsoft themselves said that there would be now more major upgrades to IE until the release of longhorn. While other browsers like firefox and netscape constantly have new features and to me are more usful than IE. But as I said there is no such thing as a perfctly secure web browser.

That's just the problem though. There are so many people out their on the internet who basically don't know how to protect themselves on the internet and there has been no effort on part of microsoft or any of these companies to even give them a clue.

[Panama Red]

Responding to Phishing scams reinforces my personal internet computing rules
1. Install, update daily and scan weekly with: Adaware, Spybot and a quality AV like AVG.
2. Run a firewall, either a router/hardware type or XP SP2/software type.
3. Most important: Think before you click! If you open an infected email, download infected programs or files, or provide personal info to a stranger, you have no one to blame for the results except the Big Dummy holding the mouse!

[Stryker]

Originally Posted by Panama Red ... If you open an infected email, download infected programs or files, or provide personal info to a stranger, you have no one to blame for the results except the Big Dummy holding the mouse!

AMEN BROTHER!!!!!

[PMich]

Originally Posted by Markoman01027 Although, IE does have vulnerabilities. I still believe that it's not the program, but rather the user who is operating it. ...

Ding Ding Ding!!! We have a winner. Responsible use is your best weapon of protection. Besides, for all this talk I hear about vulnerabilities and exploits, how many of you know anyone first hand (not thrice interweb removed) who has knowingly fallen victim to any of these vulnerabilities.

[digitalfreedom64]

I know one thing I haven't, I've got my system armed to the hilt . Still, I've started using firefox and the only reason I use IE is to update windows, I just like Firefox better.Mater of preference I guess.

[kram 2.0]

Originally Posted by EzyStvy As more and more people move away from IE, so will the hackers

The presence of the majority - that's almost exactly why Windows PCs are generally more vunerable than other platform systems. Hackers aren't going to write up a code that will get into approximately a very small amount of computer, but rather they will "go with the flow". About phishing, I am convinced that the precautions that Panama Red has posted are a paramount prevenative measure, but the best thing you can do is use common sense. If they are asking for private information, be absolutely certain that it is legitamate.

kram

[patrickt]

More power to anyone who uses any software because they enjoy the features and can do what they want to do with it. I'm quite serious when I say that's what's important. I do not agree that most people are unhappy with IE. Some are unhappy with IE, some just hate anything connected to Microsoft, and some are just joining in.

Foxfire was reasonably secure and so if my IE. I would not for a moment relax my strategies to protect myself because a new program was safer than an old program. Safer isn't the same as safe.

[mairving]

Originally Posted by Markoman01027 I bet you anything that 10 million mark is mostly consisted of people who know nothing about security, and only switched to Firefox because they dont have the common sense to be properly secured with IE. Every program will have vulnerabilities, but it's up to the user to to have common sense on how to stay protected. Dont blame everything on IE.

I would say that quite the opposite is true. The people that switch to Firefox are those that do care about security. The most common trait of someone who gets viruses and spyware and gets his machine turned into a zombie is someone who doesn't update his system or his virus scanner and doesn't go out and download another browser when they don't know how to use the one they have.

Even though there have only been 10 million downloads, it appears that the percentage of site visits using Firefox has greatly increased. I think that this is due to the fact that a lot of power surfers have started using Firefox. This will give Firefox a much higher percentage because someone who has Firefox and visits several hundred sites a day will have a much greater impact than the casual surfer who may only visit one or two. Anyway here are some browser stats compiled by W3schools gleaned from their logs and others.

  

    
2004
    
IE 6
    
IE 5
    
O 7
    
Moz
    
NN 3
    
NN 4
    
NN 7
  
  

    
December
    
67.0%
    
4.7%
    
2.1%
    
21.2%
    
0.2%
    
0.2%
    
1.2%
  
  

    
November
    
68.5%
    
5.0%
    
2.2%
    
19.3%
    
0.2%
    
0.2%
    
1.2%
  
  

    
October
    
69.5%
    
5.7%
    
2.2%
    
17.5%
    
0.2%
    
0.2%
    
1.3%
  
  

    
September
    
69.6%
    
6.2%
    
2.3%
    
16.9%
    
0.2%
    
0.2%
    
1.3%
  
  

    
August
    
70.3%
    
7.0%
    
2.3%
    
15.5%
    
0.3%
    
0.3%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
July
    
71.0%
    
7.7%
    
2.3%
    
13.8%
    
0.3%
    
0.3%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
June
    
72.4%
    
8.3%
    
2.3%
    
11.8%
    
0.3%
    
0.3%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
May
    
72.6%
    
9.2%
    
2.2%
    
11.0%
    
0.3%
    
0.3%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
April
    
72.4%
    
10.1%
    
2.1%
    
10.3%
    
0.3%
    
0.3%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
March
    
72.1%
    
10.7%
    
2.1%
    
9.6%
    
0.4%
    
0.4%
    
1.4%
  
  

    
February
    
71.5%
    
11.5%
    
2.2%
    
9.0%
    
0.4%
    
0.4%
    
1.5%
  
  

    
January
    
71.3%
    
12.8%
    
2.1%
    
8.2%
    
0.4%
    
0.5%
    
1.5%
  
  

  

    
IE
    
Internet Explorer
  
  

    
AOL
    
America Online *
  
  

    
Moz
    
Mozilla
  
  

    
O
    
Opera
  
  

    
NN
    
Netscape
  
  

Interesting that the percentage of users using Mozilla (Mozilla & Firefox) has gone from 8.2% to 21.2% in a years time. The current trend is that it is going up at a rate of about 2% a month. Site stats from 20 or so sites that I have are also in line with this trend.

[digitalfreedom64]

I think it's about time that someone has finally got the gutts to challenge microsoft's dominance. They've gotten way to arrogant in the past few years and think they can throw their weight around just anyway they feel like it. I'm in full support of all these browser and mediaplayer companies that are trying to stand up to microsoft. I don't know about anyone else but i'm tired of the same ole drab practically featureless IE. I mean IE has been around for years and has hardly changed a bit. I like a lot more functionality out of my browser than IE can offer.

[glc]

Let's not bash Microsoft. However, advocating freedom of choice is fine.

[digitalfreedom64]

Originally Posted by glc Let's not bash Microsoft. However, advocating freedom of choice is fine.

Sorry maybe I got a little too spirited about gettig my point across. I have no problems with Microsoft. It's just that microsoft claims that users have not said that they want new features yet the amount of users using these browsers that have all those features keeps growing. The they have the arrogance to say that these browsers pose no threat to the browser market shares. I'm not trying to bash microsoft. I just think it's time that IE caugh t up with the times, a lot of people these days want more functionality out of their browser than IE can provide.

[Markoman01027]

the thing is..people bash microsoft for how vulnerable their software is, and how buggy it is..the question is..can you sit down with a group of people and code an entire OS without being buggy? I don't think it will happen. People bash M$, but when it comes down to coding an OS, they wont be able to do it, and even with programming experience, you're bound to have buggy software. Humans do make errors.

[shadowbreaker513]

I just prefer Firefox overall. I'm addicted to tabbed browsing and all the different themes for it. For some reason I also seem to download faster and webpages seem to load faster for me. One thing I have noticed is, on systems with lower amounts of memory, IE does seem to go faster than Firefox. I don't consider Firefox a cureall and nobody should. I just like it much better than IE, and only consider it as a little bit of extra protection.

[PMich]

Originally Posted by Kov-Ice Interesting to note in the article that IE has dropped under 90% usage for the first time in a decade.

Just a point of clarification but the article states that IE dropped under 90% usage in this decade, which I think means since 2000 and that may not be accurate either.

[mb26]

"the question is..can you sit down with a group of people and code an entire OS without being buggy? I don't think it will happen. People bash M$, but when it comes down to coding an OS, they wont be able to do it, and even with programming experience, you're bound to have buggy software. Humans do make errors."
they've had over 20 years and the biggest mountain of money on this earth, u'd think they could get pretty damn close to perfection. with that kind of cash, they could send the whole of M$ onto the moon, or feed the whole of africa, an OS is small marbles. u'd think they could get closer than a bunch of unpaid programmers doing it in their spare time giving away their OSes for free..
aslong as ur willing to accept a buggy os, thats what u'll get. personally i think M$ have stagnated and aren't bringing anything new to the table of substance anymore.. they still have the best OS though..

as for the article, it seems to be talking about popups, which both IE and firefox have covered.

i disagree the user is at fault with IE (for everything), if u sell to 'stupid people', then your software should work for them. u should be able to sit a monkey infront of the screen, have it click where it likes, look at all the porn sites it wants, and not f up ur computer. sit an idiot infront of firefox they aren't going to have as many problems IMO.

"they dont have the common sense to be properly secured with IE" maybe they'd prefer firefox itself? sure they could spend time securing up IE every time something new comes up, or get firefox. people dont have time to check everything is secured all the time.

"If you open an infected email, download infected programs or files.. you have no one to blame for the results except the Big Dummy holding the mouse!" providing it has a big "infected programs here" label on it. i agree that those falling for 'phishing' scams usually only have themselves to blame, but there are vulnerable people, like old people who may be a little naiive about the internet and such.. they could easily be fooled by these kind of scams.

also i dont think u can blame 'market share' whole-ly for having more security issues, FF fixes issues far more quickly than M$ when they do occur.

as for browser preferance, personally i prefer firefox, now i have used it its a pain to use IE, with >5 windows open tabs are a must.. i also like all the plugin things.. and that its more secure. people often ask why is firefox better, but i have yet to hear a reason why IE is actually better than firefox? (besides being preinstalled!)

[Statica]

These IE vs Firefox threads are getting quite ridiculous, as much as the Intel vs AMD threads. I mean look at the subject of the thread : "It's not just IE, then?" .. rather than a simple "Firefox and IE vulnerable to phishing" or "Vulnerability in Firefox" .. and then it gets progressively worse.

It's pretty simple here .. there are choices at everything, in 1995; Microsoft started off with Internet Explorer 1.0 to counter the increasing popularity of Netscape. It didn't take, but did push the envelope on how a web browser could be; IE didn't really take till IE 3.0 really .. that's when users faced their first crossroads - hardcore Netscape users vs those that liked the integrated and "seemingly" clean interface on IE.

So now we've come at another crossroad in the browser continuum - there's an emerging (or shall we say resurrected) browser that seems to be growing in popularity amongst some users. It is not the cure-all for all web issues; neither is it the pinnacle of the web experience .. it is just a step in the evolution of a browser.
It's a choice guys .. as simple as that .. feel free to use whatever you like, whatever is convenient for you, whatever works for your users.

It's pretty normal to be targetted by a variety of attacks, feeling secure merely based on the choice of a browser is beyond stupid. So is feeling secure because of choice of a particular brand of antivirus or a particular router model. People have to start accepting that there are only degrees of security; just like browsers, antivirus suites, spyware cleaners evolve - so do hackers, crackers and phishers. Just because you run Norton Antivirus doesn't mean that you are sitting with an impenetrable system; no everything has its weak points and its vulnerabilities. I think that is the first step to good system and security management.


I have to respond to one thing, though ... while it's ridiculous to see how many people bash Microsoft; simply chalking it up to human error isn't going to cut it. So you go out and pay money for a car and find that it's a lemon, it's hard to believe you would shrug and say - "well seeing how as I don't know how to assemble a car, even though I do know a bit about working on cars .. what can you do .. it's human error" - well how would it be any different for a product that you've paid for - like an operating system?

Now understanding the psyche of the dumb whining that goes on about Microsoft is another thing. I can say from personal experience that, from Windows 2000, Microsoft has consistently put out an amazing Operating system, that is able to cater to the needs to a very WIDE RANGE of computer users, while doing it on the most generic platform out there (x86) .. you cannot say that about any other operating system. The OS has evolved remarkably, and yet they have continued to support their older operating systems. While there are a ton of Apple users that will lay claim to using the perfect operating system; it hardly makes it a machine of mass appeal. While it doesn't require the experience of a UNIX user, it still doesn't cater to the masses. Microsoft, with its Windows lineup of OS' has succeeded in getting every sane person on this planet - computer literate or not, at least thinking of owning a computer; and also has endowed them with the ability to believe that they can use their computer. DOS did not do that, Apple does not do it (historically prohibitive pricing and dogged determination of refusal to open their technologies), UNIX/Linux does not do it - it has been something that started since the introduction of Windows.
If Windows wasn't meant for such a wide audience, a lot of the criticism levelled against it would simply not be there. Consider that you buy Microsoft PCs, they know the hardware, they know the software, it would work flawlessly every time. However, you now have the freedom to run a computer with a $30 stick of RAM you found at the bottom of your shoebox, on a motherboard made by PCChips (that recently won an award from MaximoPC for outstanding products ) and see if it works - and given the fact that 90+ people out of every 100 can run Windows; I'd say it's a fine product.

[glc]

I use a lot of non-Microsoft software simply by personal choice. I like the 3rd party alternatives better. Simple as that. I use Windows 2000 because I do believe that it's an outstanding OS, it does what I need (supports my applications - isn't that really the bottom line?), and has been remarkably stable and robust. I use Office 97 because, once again, it does what I need and gives me no trouble. However, when it comes to browsers , e-mail clients, newsreaders, and media players, I do not like the Microsoft products and use 3rd party.

[Stryker]

I have always noticed that people complain about "all of the problems" that continually are brought up with Microsoft. Do you think maybe it's a matter of numbers and not quality? That's like complaining that Canada has SOOOOO many more snow related accidents than the US. Perhaps because the number of populated areas in Canada that get snow is slightly higher than snowy areas of the US?

Let's compare apples to apples... Microsoft gets a lot of bad press, mainly due to people who don't understand that when you have an exponentially larger volume of products than other corporations, you are bound to have more issues as well.

Just my humble opinion,
Stryker

[Statica]

Originally Posted by glc I use a lot of non-Microsoft software simply by personal choice. I like the 3rd party alternatives better. Simple as that. I use Windows 2000 because I do believe that it's an outstanding OS, it does what I need (supports my applications - isn't that really the bottom line?), and has been remarkably stable and robust. I use Office 97 because, once again, it does what I need and gives me no trouble. However, when it comes to browsers , e-mail clients, newsreaders, and media players, I do not like the Microsoft products and use 3rd party.

That is what it's all about .. personal choice, as plain as that. It also means that you actively seek out what is a good choice. Heck everyone does it on a personal day - in buying fast food or in buying clothes. As with everything else, and it's especially true of Computers and Information technology. A line that I've always found funny and yet could relate to, when hearing about people resistant to change, was by Homer .. "Why do you need new bands? Everyone knows rock attained perfection in 1974. It's a scientific fact."
Why do we have more sophisticated means of being hacked? Simply because Internet technologies are getting more sophisticated. So we use Paypal to pass on money to people across the continent - thus was born the art of trying to phish for someone's paypal account. I mean, when the concept of a computer virus was born; there was no internet banking, online flight reservation ..
I would be remiss if I didn't express my strong feelings against Microsoft's favoring activex in its browsers; but under the basic security structure, it still is dependent on a user to allow the vulnerability.
I'll give you an example of how I see the web has progressed .. I started using PC-Cillin as a r/t scan from about 1998/99 - till then I didn't believe that I needed a r/t antivirus. Since then, there have been numerous versions - versions that started off as a base antivirus, progressively got tagged on with an email scan, then came network security - in the form of a firewall, progressed on to then getting added with Wi-Fi protection, and spam protection .. and now I find that the latest version comes with Antiphishing, wifi protection from wardrivers and a loopback to windows security updates by doing a threat assessment.

That is the nature of progress folks .. remember that you are playing on defense, and by design your security measures are going to be REACTIVE to what's out there. Claiming that one browser, one OS, one antivirus has achieved perfection is a fatal mistake; make your personal choice, keep your eyes and mind open to other choices; these aren't choices that a particular website or an author can determine for you .. it is based on your stupidities and your inabilities to understand what's at stake by driving your mouse to click a button or link.

[HAL9000]

Originally Posted by Statica That is the nature of progress folks .. remember that you are playing on defense, and by design your security measures are going to be REACTIVE to what's out there. Claiming that one browser, one OS, one antivirus has achieved perfection is a fatal mistake; make your personal choice, keep your eyes and mind open to other choices; these aren't choices that a particular website or an author can determine for you .. it is based on your stupidities and your inabilities to understand what's at stake by driving your mouse to click a button or link.

Thank you... that is what it is all about and I wish that some people would take that statement to heart when replying to a thread where somebody has a problem with IE and gives "the cure" as "Install Firefox". Nothing wrong with the browser, but it's not a cure.

[Rebel_526]

Statica, I think your closer to the mark than most......I teach classes on computer service and repair.....basically and A+ prep.....I attempt to expose my students to what they will run into 'in the world', so I have several Linux machines, of various distros, Windows, and a couple Apples. Mostly, though, I focus on Windows- 98 and up, with a smidge of DOS . I can say, without hesitation, that the Windows platform in general is far superior to any other in terms of usability, hardware configurations, and overall easy of use by the 'average' person.

M$ has created an OS that will run on 95% of the hardware configurations anyone could possibly imagine, and believe me, with the thousands of different hardware manufacturers out there, I can imagine alot! I can, for example, grab nearly and pile of hardware (supposing it's free of hardware defects), throw it together, load Windows, and have a running machine in less than two hours. The same can not be said for any other OS out there.

Now, some would argue that it's because M$ 'is the most popular OS and all the manufacturers make drivers for WinDOSE', this is true, but think about that statement....'the most popular OS', why? Because it's designed to be easy for the novice user. Period. And that encompasses the majority of computer users. Anyone that has worked in the retail computer market knows that most people that own or use computers are doing good to know where the power button is, let alone how to configure a network, format a disk, create a back-up CD/DVD, etc, etc. Windows makes it easier for the 'regular' users to accomplish these things.

As far as the drivers go, M$ actively seeks out the major hardware manufacturers and works with them. There is an existing relationship there that does not exist with other OS's. That, in a nutshell, is why we can take an Asus Mobo, Creative sound card, Intel CPU, Crucial RAM, ATI video card, Sony CD, Toshiba floppy drive, and an Antec PSU.....throw it all together and be surfing the net in a flash.

The security part is really a pragmatic issue. Kram8806 is right here, hackers will go for the majority. Why? Not because it's 'less secure', but because it has a larger market share, and there by more 'targets' to go after....meaning a higher percentage of success. Let's remember that hacking is mostly a trial and error thing. These security holes are not just found by someone sitting in a room and pouring over billions of lines of code and suddenly exclaiming "Ah HA!". Quite the opposite, it takes TEAMS of people trying this, trying that, over and over again, with different variables thrown into the mix, in order to find a vulnerability. Once Linux has a higher market share and the hacking types start focusing on it, I'll bet we will be hearing alot more about vulnerabilities with it.

Anyways, sorry I got to rambling

[sataraid0]

Hmmmm, I use firefox browser by choice, but IE is a good browser just prefer firefox. Have also used Opera and a couple others. Don't believe the browser is the problem as far as security is concerned.

My take, after attending numorus pc open meetings, teaching a novice pc class at the local senior center, servicing a few clients pc in the local area:::::iis just this. and I think most of ya will agree::::

The people dealing with computers have no clue about security. It is an education issue. Most particularly, a lot of older people can just about find their way around a computer, let alone be up on ways to protect themselfs from hackers and malware attacks. Now don't get me wrong, not saying all older people ( I'm 63 myself) and think I am pretty well up on security. But the ones I have seen, just want to be able to send email to their family members and maybe look up a reciepe or 2.

It is very hard to educate these, because computers are a very small part of their life. Not like us, computers on the brain all the time. ha ha Think this is why AOL is so popular, because the lay out is already done for most people and they are taking giant steps on making thier browser safer.

Its a damn shame that people cant surf the internet safely, with out having to arm themselves to the teeth so to speak and learn scads of things to protect themselves. However that is the world we are stuck with.

Recommendations. Do whatever you can to educate your friends and family about proper protection on the internet. Here always talking to my daughter and grandson about keeping their programs up to date and running them often. Also like teaching at the senior center and helping when I can.

Guess it is kinda like what u are all doing here, helping each other with computers and u all are doing a great job. Just don't forget the others that are not as into it as we are. They need lots of help

Regards............and thanks for all your help to me............Sterling

[Statica]

Great comments out there, and I personally am pleased by the direction this thread has taken - we've gone from understanding that it isn't about Firefox being the most secure browser on the planet or IE being the most vulnerable, it's about proper EDUCATION on what it means to engage in a safe computing environment. And that's a reason why I come back to this thread, I've historically stayed away from too much participation in these reflective, subjective threads because my reality isn't necessarily someone else's.

sataraid0 raises an exceptional point, one of education and research in using computers. That is the starting point for being less of a target to attacks.

Again, coming back to mb26' point about patches for Microsoft's offerings being slow to permeate through .. consider the facts. When you have such a huge % of people running their OS it takes time to properly test out the patches, mostly because such patches have such far reaching effects. Look at the way XP is laid out, its now MS' universal OS for all computers and all users; it makes the issue much more complicated. NT and Windows 2000 had service packs and patches being released much more frequently, not because Microsoft has an inability to deploy patches at the drop of a hat, but it has probably more to do because of the target audience of NT or 2K professional (these OS' were released parallel to home user operating systems like 98 and ME). So now you've got this HUGE population of users with varying degrees of knowledge and pretense of the same, that need to be delivered patches and service packs that fix issues, contain new features, yet must be easy to install, universally successful - to be assimilated by people who are largely pessimistic (My thread on SP success rate was something that I found remarkable in that sense .. even though we had over 80% of respondents with successful installs - keep in mind also that this is a troubleshooting BB .. not a place where people come to say "all is well" - real world numbers are probably much higher; people will still claim to be wary of a servicepack because it comes from Microsoft).

Education, is what is lacking, in telling people what they are likely to be targetted by, and what is needed to keep safe. Yes, it's rather shameful that we have to tell people to go on the web armed to the teeth; but again, that is what is happening for everything. Cars aren't designed or improved based on what happens when you get home safe every night, they are designed for those instances when you don't - from seatbelts to varying technologies for impact detection and protection.

And that is what this site and this forum is about - proper education through community interaction. So saying that this browser and this program will protect you ad infinituum; is miseducation - and a dangerous trend that must be stopped. Accept the realities that a hole will come up where none existed before. I feel for people like Hal, who has to deal with people who have been miseducated about the merits of Firefox (yes! miseducation can be both in "OVER-extolling" virtues and in OVER-deriding the flaws) and have proceeded to dump their antivirus. Of course, in moments of frustration I have been known to say - good riddance to these people who have got derailed off the internet .. less people spreading their virus to their buddies on their addressbooks