| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Firefox Plugs GIF Security Hole | |
|
||
| Time: 16:44 EST/21:44 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: Robert Stein | ||
|
Thanks Bruce. "In a not-so-subtle tweak at Microsoft, Hoffman said the recent growth of Firefox was not related to the back-to-back security patches. "It is not relational at all. Not being in the operating system and not supporting Microsoft's proprietary Active X are phenomenal advantages for us," he said." | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:17:12 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 3/23/2005 8:15:41 PM |
|
"Microsoft's proprietary Active X"
WHAT? One last time, ActiveX is a COM Client - it was jointly developed and built on COM by IBM, Sun Microsysystems and yes, Microsoft [among many others]. MS, seeking to leverage technologies it had in COM evolved it the furthest as an enabling technology, allowing many heterogeneous systems and components to communicate with each other. It allows for the construction of dynamic, distributed systems in a time and resource efficient manner while leveraging existing resources. There are many forms of COM and "all" present very similar strengths and weaknesses - including security weaknesses. Microsoft's treatment of ActiveX and COM Clients/Objects of all types under XP SP2 is nothing short of phenominally good - it preserves and even extends the benefits while it allows for the easy management of the technology. It is but one of MS's means of executing OLE and was/is intended to merge the desktop with the Internet. There are tens of thousands of COM Objects and Controls that make use of ActiveX Development tools and which have been developed on that model. To suggest or believe for a second that browsers other than IE do not use similar models that present equal exploit paths is not supported by fact. Finally an appeal: "Dear MS, please rename ActiveX and finally refer to it as COM+, only - so people will stop spreading this junk - thank you." "all non-MS folks, please do some searches for practical comparisons of component and distributed object technologies, such as CORBA, DCOM, RMI, ActiveX and Beans...please, before crud like this confuses anyone else." |
| #2 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 3/23/2005 9:25:33 PM |
|
Mozilla's open-source software is inherently safer and more secure than traditional commercial code because it is scoured by thousands of contributors, developers and professionals, not just the company's development team," he said.
Thousands? Scoured? Can I have a list of those developers, so I can ask them exactly what "scouring" means? |
| #3 By 2960 (156.80.64.60) at 3/24/2005 8:28:19 AM |
|
Parker, have a cup of coffee or something. Jeez...
Anyway downloading a NEW version of firefox is smaller than many PATCHES MS has had for IE. Get over it. TL |
| #4 By 23278 (12.11.161.5) at 3/24/2005 8:46:19 AM |
|
#11 I hope you're not serious. Like all of a sudden downloading and installing a whole new version of Firefox is worth it since its smaller than downloading all those patches for IE.
A few of my friends use Firefox and they lost all of their favorites and stuff trying to "upgrade" their Firefox. But I guess I can see how that's what's best since it is smaller than downloading patches to IE... |
| #5 By 3653 (63.162.177.143) at 3/24/2005 12:01:03 PM |
| The silence of the mozilla lovers is DEAFENING. |
| #6 By 13030 (198.22.121.120) at 3/24/2005 12:25:04 PM |
|
#12: A few of my friends use Firefox and they lost all of their favorites and stuff trying to "upgrade" their Firefox.
Your friends need technical "support". Since I like occasionally trying out the nightly builds, I simply delete the Firefox directory and unzip the latest build into it. I've done this for over a year and never lost any favorites or other settings in Firefox. Of course, on most of my systems I just download the new version and unzip. For those that wish, uninstalling and reinstalling the new version also works without disrupting any settings. More importantly, I can download and install a new Firefox version in less time than I can update IE with a patch. #13: Who is this Parker guy Some guy, rumors say, that sleeps with a Bill Gates doll. |
| #7 By 13030 (198.22.121.120) at 3/24/2005 3:57:39 PM |
|
#16: Attack the users
Actually, I just don't buy the "lost all settings" story from the previous poster considering the different ways I've updated my Firefox installs. My previous posts always show a concern for users of any caliber and income--you do remember I am the one that sticks up for the folks still using Windows 95 and Office 95 since they still get the job done for nearly everyone. You and many of the other AW MS apologists are the ones belittling users for not having upgraded to Windows XP SP2. Typical potty mouth reply from the Slashdot trolls. Why are you sticking up for Parker? And, more importantly, what do you have against Bill Gates? (Wrong troll--I visit slashdot maybe once a month, if even that.) |
| #8 By 23278 (24.147.235.53) at 3/24/2005 11:51:19 PM |
|
ch you've got to be kidding me. You think I'm making up that story about my friends upgrading?
Paranoia... I've tried FireFox and Mozilla and they aren't worth the hassle and their stories just reconfirmed it for me. |
| #9 By 11888 (64.230.71.176) at 3/25/2005 12:55:04 AM |
|
I'm TIRED of that guy constantly stealing from George Carlin and not giving him credit!!
How long is this going to go on for? Weeks? Months? |
| #10 By 37 (67.37.29.142) at 3/25/2005 10:41:33 PM |
| Man....FF *IS* a security hole. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 161 Last | Next |
The time now is
2:17:12 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
