Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Microsoft's Turn-off mode in IE8 not enough, says Opera.
Josh:
Agreed. The ACID test would be a great tool and yes the reason it isn't important for MODERN sites is due to MS. I just don't think you can use a single test as a way to say "I am compliant". Why not just use the validator provided by the w3c? It can check your code and make sure it is up to par.
Another issue arises with third party scripting languages like JS, PHP and the like. some of those can be tricked into passing wrong data to the server thus returning exploitable web addresses or code to the user.
Josh:
In its first statement in response to Microsoft's decision announced over the weekend to enable Windows 7 users to deactivate and/or uninstall Internet Explorer 8 after the operating system's setup installs it, a spokesperson for Google, which makes the Chrome browser, told Betanews overnight that not only should Windows users be given the option to choose their browsers during setup, but to do so every time they turn their machines on.
"We have not yet been able to see the planned new features of Internet Explorer but are looking forward to examining them when they are released. The Internet was founded on choice and openness and this requires a level playing field with multiple options for accessing it. From the moment a computer is turned on, people should be able to access a range of browsers easily and quickly," the spokesperson stated.
--- End quote ---
More at Source
Quite frankly, If I have to choose each and every time I boot my PC what browser I want to use, as google suggests, then I clearly think google needs to re-evaluate the software market and look at just how a computer operating system works. This is getting ludicrous. It's like the others are whining because they don't have an OS to include their own browser in by default. Microsoft makes Windows, Microsoft makes IE, they should be able to bundle both together as they deem fit.
app103:
You know, for years people have complained about Microsoft including IE with Windows, wanting them to stop.
But they fail to consider this:
If Microsoft didn't include a browser with their OS, then what would you use to visit a site and download your browser of choice?
How do you visit a site and download Chrome, Firefox, K-Meleon, Opera, Safari, or any other browser if you don't have a browser to begin with?
I do agree that IE shouldn't be so deeply integrated into the OS, and it should be completely removable, but the idea of requiring Microsoft to get rid of it entirely is just crazy and not well thought out.
What would be the alternative to Microsoft including IE? Would it be better to include a bundle of every browser in creation for the user to choose from? How would this be any different than a bloated OEM crapware bundle? And you just know if they did that, that some browser developer somewhere would cry foul because his wasn't included in the bundle. Before you know it, you'll need an extra 8G of space just for the browser bundle or Microsoft will have to toss in another 2 DVD disks with the setup files for all of them.
And why target Microsoft and nobody else? Does Apple's OSX come with a browser? Who made that browser? How is it really any different? Why doesn't anyone cry about Apple doing it, like they cry about Microsoft?
I haven't had a single malware issue that wasn't due to a user just clicking "install". That is not IE's fault. IE provides a mechanism which provides great functionality. What we really need, rather than removing IE from Windows, is to educate the userbase so they know better. That is what I do and 9 times out of 10, I never have the same user back for the same problem.
-Josh (March 10, 2009, 05:29 PM)
--- End quote ---
Since the release of IE6 SP2, I have not seen a single issue with drive-by malware installs that was the fault of IE. Just like you, the issues I have seen were the results of the user clicking install.
In the case of the drive-by installs I have seen, they were the fault of another company's software, mostly Flash and Java, which are not exclusive to IE, nor are they Microsoft's products.
Or they were IE based browsers like AOL, or the one that was once included with Ares Galaxy, or an IE based RSS reader, none of which included the extra safeguards built into the Microsoft supplied IE user interface. Again, not the fault of Microsoft if another developer gets lazy and skimps or takes shortcuts on their own product.
One of the nastiest pieces of malware I have had to remove was Winfixer/Virtumundo, which gets on a system by exploiting a vulnerability in an older version of Sun's JRE. The problem is that Sun doesn't uninstall the old vulnerable versions when you upgrade your JRE. They leave them on your system to be exploited. So just because you have everything up to date, you can still be a sitting duck to the drive-by malware attacks that the older stuff is vulnerable to.
And most people don't know this and don't know they have to remove the older JRE versions. I sure didn't before I got hit with the first attack (for the record, the browser used was Firefox). I thought the newer versions of JRE that I was installing required the older ones to stay on my machine. I thought they were installed as patches on top of the older version, like some other software I have does. I thought the extra entries in add/remove programs was so I could roll back if I had any problems with the newer version. I never for one moment thought that Sun was doing something so stupid as leaving multiple exploitable individual versions on my machine.
And I am sure most users are as oblivious to that issue as I was. And you don't have to be a stupid newbie to think that. I know plenty of experienced knowledgeable power users that don't know.
And this is not the fault of Microsoft, and not related to IE.
f0dder:
How do you visit a site and download Chrome, Firefox, K-Meleon, Opera, Safari, or any other browser if you don't have a browser to begin with?
--- End quote ---
A stub that only allows you to download browsers, perhaps? :P (or, the way it'd be done in order to show how f'ing ludicruous this idea is: you'd have to find your browser from some distribution media. That'd piss non-*u*x people off). Alternately, a decent package manager for Windows...
I do agree that IE shouldn't be so deeply integrated into the OS, and it should be completely removable, but the idea of requiring Microsoft to get rid of it entirely is just crazy and not well thought out.
--- End quote ---
Considering what "IE" is, uprooting it is a bad idea. The libraries it offers are useful. Apart from that, I don't find IE (the browser part) to be very tightly integrated in the operating system, except for Windows Update. Sure, there's a few apps that launch IE instead of your primary browser, but that's not IE's fault. There's also apps that launch explorer.exe instead of the shell handler for Folder/Directory - FireFox, for instance.
And why target Microsoft and nobody else? Does Apple's OSX come with a browser? Who made that browser? How is it really any different? Why doesn't anyone cry about Apple doing it, like they cry about Microsoft?
--- End quote ---
Because Apple is an underdog, and it's users are zealots. Their gurus can't be wrong. EU and the like obviously only target the reeeeeally big companies.
The problem is that Sun doesn't uninstall the old vulnerable versions when you upgrade your JRE. They leave them on your system to be exploited. So just because you have everything up to date, you can still be a sitting duck to the drive-by malware attacks that the older stuff is vulnerable to.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, this is bad - shame on you, Sun! And because Java applets are executed through an alternate process (flash isn't btw), IE7+'s Protected Mode (on Vista w/UAC) probably doesn't help much. (I should read up on the PM though - it could be that java.exe is being started by iexplore.exe so it also runs with reduced rights).
And this is not the fault of Microsoft, and not related to IE.
--- End quote ---
Try explaining *u*x morons that flash and java based exploits isn't IE's fault :P
fenixproductions:
The libraries it offers are useful.-f0dder
--- End quote ---
What makes whole case sound even more as "whims of the loosers" is fact that none of them offer replacement for it.
Sometimes I really wonder what could they do if MS said "Enough! No more Win for Europe" ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version