[OT] Opera / Maxthon / Firefox, etc.

Stance · Post by *Stance » 2006-01-30, 23:26 UTC

OT
petermad, could you please delete the name and the city from your posting in:
Edit: Link removed

;Thanks in advance
Stance

Post by *petermad » 2006-01-31, 00:10 UTC

2Stance
Why - They are the names that comes up when I click Xtricians ICQ button http://wwp.icq.com/scripts/search.dll?to=211290 - how can they be any secret?

Stance · Post by *Stance » 2006-01-31, 01:54 UTC

OT
petermad,
too late anyway! Another damage to this forum.
Please try to Google for: Netiquette
Especially: Pseudonym and Realname

Stance

Sam_Zen · Post by *Sam_Zen » 2006-01-31, 02:16 UTC

I never tried Opera, so I don't have an opinion, but from the start (NT4), my first principle was : use M$ products at least as possible, so I started with Nutscape, ending with ver 4.7, because after that things got worse due to aol-nagging.
Then I had Mozilla for a short time and after that splitted this into Firefox and Thunderbird with satisfaction.
(running 2K). I don't care much about speed, functionality is more a priority to me.
I noticed that IE on XP banned nutscape-like plugins any more, while FF on XP still do the job.

SQUIRE · Post by *SQUIRE » 2006-01-31, 02:52 UTC

Sam Zen wrote: Nutscape

NutScape?

Very droll, Sam!
Give Opera a spin now that it's free. After all, FF stole most of its tricks there. And how d'you feel about cuntry music?

majkinetor ! · Post by *majkinetor ! » 2006-01-31, 08:53 UTC

Sir_Silva wrote:Btw finding lesser Sec-Bugs in a PRG doesnt mean its safer - only fewer people looking for them

This means it is safer !

I use Opera, of course, the last 9.0 beta version. The Opera is greatest because too many thing to be listed here, among which I can underline those:

- zoom in / zoom out (ACDC like access on + / -)
- every aspect customizable
- crash detection
- "open only request pop-ups"
- mouse gestures

it is bad because of :

- history & cache (not practical at all, once there was a progy that made it look like IE's, but doesn't work anymore)
- doesn't handle well some of the pages writen for IE in mind.
- no mht
- have slower and slower startup on URL history fill... (confirmed, delete the URL history and it will have even several seconds faster startup)

Firefox is snobbish isue... Opera had such features long time ago but nobody wanted to know...

IE is no-comment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have 1 question for all who are able to answer:

We read all the time that IE is not secure because of so-called "wrong concept (ie ActiveX)".... well that is strange. ActiveX is IE's plugin format while other browsers use NPAPI (Netscape Plugin API). I wonder what is the difference except funcionality - AcitveX alows much better integration with IE (netscape plugins are MIME handler plugins acctually). As far as I know, ActiveX can't install itself, so you are responsible for eventual damage. On the other hand, Netscape plugins can be malitious also, nobody can prevent that, the only difference to be installatin procedure (in first place you only click YES, in second you run setup or copy dlls). So where comes that "wrong concept"

BTW, what are workarounds for IE pages in Opera... I currently solve this with "Open in IE" button.

icfu · Post by *icfu » 2006-01-31, 10:25 UTC

BTW, what are workarounds for IE pages in Opera... I currently solve this with "Open in IE" button.

Switch to "Identify as IE", write email to the site developer that his code sucks (most of the time it's not Opera's fault), use the entry in menu "report problems with this site". Opera developers are continously examining webpages and expanding browser.js file with some fixes.

Wikipedia has a section about comparison of NPAPI and ActiveX which covers it all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NPAPI

It comes down to this, I think:

A popular misconception concerning the NPAPI technology is that a plugin is somehow inherently safer than an ActiveX control. Both run native machine instructions with the same privileges as the host process. Thus a malicious plugin can do as much damage as a malicious ActiveX control.

One important difference between NPAPI and ActiveX is that NPAPI is solely for Internet plugins, while ActiveX is used for a wide variety of purposes, including application composition in Visual Basic. A typical Windows user has a vast array of ActiveX controls installed, a number of which are probably marked "safe for scripting", but are not actually secure. Any of these can be used as angles to subvert the user's computer.

So, widely known is that ActiveX can simply do "too much" and therefore is not controllable by users if you are not running Sandboxie or something like that.

Only problems is: X7r1c14n 31337 h4x0r can not be stopped this way.

Icfu

majkinetor ! · Post by *majkinetor ! » 2006-01-31, 10:36 UTC

Of course Xtr1c14n 31337 h4x0r can not be stopped this way

NO ? OH YOUR GOD !

So, widely known is that ActiveX can simply do "too much" and therefore is not controllable by users if you are not running Sandboxie or something like that.

Not true ! ActiveX can do more of course.... but I don't see a reason for NPs to do whatever they want either. The only thing I see is that you need to start browser at least ones for NPs to take control (and encounter apropiriate MIME extension, but that is easy if plugin is set to handle hmtl), while IE is integrated in the system, so infection is much more probable.

Sandbox
This is awesome.... Thank you

B@rndH · Post by *B@rndH » 2006-01-31, 10:55 UTC

OT:

icfu wrote: running Sandboxie or something like that

Nice thingie. Thanx for the link

Do you know faster alternatives?

majkinetor ! · Post by *majkinetor ! » 2006-01-31, 10:57 UTC

Some Virtual machine maybe... but that is not the very same thing....

icfu · Post by *icfu » 2006-01-31, 10:59 UTC

The only thing I see is that you need to start browser at least ones for NPs to take control, while IE is integrated in the system, so infection is much more probable.

Exactly, well, besides that IE isn't really "integrated" in system as much as Microsoft claims, nLite and 98Lite/LiteXP prove that.

Actually I like ActiveX, the only problem is that the security mechanisms are bad. The box presented by Microsoft whenever an ActiveX wants to take control is a joke. EVERY standard user will click yes when a site claims that this and that is needed so the default setting should be too disallow ActiveX. The same goes for all that "certificates" crap, no user knows what all the fuss is about.

Opera has *at least* the advantage that plugins have to be installed before usage or manually be copied to the plugins directory, this is an active process protecting the user just because he is forced to think about what he is doing there before actually doing it.

Icfu

icfu · Post by *icfu » 2006-01-31, 11:00 UTC

Nice thingie. Thanx for the link
Do you know faster alternatives?

Not right now, sorry. I have even never used it myself because I am using Opera and I trust my always active brain mod 2.0.

Icfu

B@rndH · Post by *B@rndH » 2006-01-31, 11:06 UTC

icfu wrote:... I trust my always active brain mod 2.0.

I still like it ... especially considering too long days at the console and such .... you know those times when brain activity starts do go down willingly or not

Better safe than sorry, I say

frenky · Post by *frenky » 2006-01-31, 11:07 UTC

majkinetor ! wrote:Some Virtual machine maybe... but that is not the very same thing....

Browser Appliance: Firefox 1.5 on Ubuntu 5.10
http://www.vmware.com/vmtn/vm/browserapp.html

majkinetor ! · Post by *majkinetor ! » 2006-01-31, 11:44 UTC

[OT]

2 frenky
Hej frenky, would you like transparent background?

[face=comicsansms]Like you can see, we are in phase of transition. We change our backgrounds to be transparent, and so, we are much much cooler guys. If you want to be cool as we are, you must consider removing your background.

Thank you[/face]