OMG Privacy Leak in Mozilla

[allida77]

http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/10792_1463911

This is why mozilla will never be as popular as ie. Not because of the bug but because there is currently and no fix. If this was a ie bug it would be plastered on all web sites and they are forced to make fixes ASAP.

Also I didnt know that:

"Mozilla.org, the open source browser project backed by AOL Time Warner."

Its just a matter of time until it turns into netscrap.

[mouse]

The problem with Mozilla is and always has been the release of really buggy editions. I really believe some ISP's would ship it if there was a less hurried approach to building the prowser, at the moment it changes every other day so nobody knows what to download or not.

[jkd]

Originally posted by allida77
This is why mozilla will never be as popular as ie. Not because of the bug but because there is currently and no fix. If this was a ie bug it would be plastered on all web sites and they are forced to make fixes ASAP.

Excuse me, but IE currently has ~20 unpatched remote root exploits. They have been known for months. Obviously that there are many many sites clearly explaining how to exploit these flaws in IE has done nothing to pressure MS into fixing them.

This is a privacy leak, not nearly as serious as letting any script kiddy take over your computer through a malicous webpage.

Mozilla security exploits are patched in a matter of hours to days. This is the first serious bug of its kind that has taken longer than that.

Before voicing an opinionated view, get the facts straight: Mozilla is still the most secure browser. This is ignoring browsers like Lynx that can't do enough to be a security risk.


And mouse: Mozilla 1.0 and 1.1 are some of the most bug-free browsers I have ever used. Pre-0.96 was pretty buggy imho, but still usable. Since then, it has matured into a very usable and powerful web browser, as well as a cross-platform applications-development API.

[Pikeus]

"If this was a ie bug it would be plastered on all web sites and they are forced to make fixes ASAP. " - allida77

LMAO!! :D

Wherever did you get that information from? Microsoft would probably take about 1 month to admit that there's even a problem, then take a few weeks to produce the patch after admitting the problem was serious. I would suggest researching Microsoft's track record in bug fixing.

"'Mozilla.org, the open source browser project backed by AOL Time Warner.' Its just a matter of time until it turns into netscrap." - allida77

I don't think you understand what Open Source is. It means that anybody can obtain the source code for the browser. This means that if Mozilla appears to be taking the wrong track, thousands of developers will take the code and make their own version of Mozilla. There's absoultely 100% no reason to worry about Mozilla going bad.

Mouse, like JKD said.

www.mozilla.org

[allida77]

My comment is not meant to put one browser better than the other. It is to show that having an open source browser limits user support. At least people with ie can blame MS, but with Moz who can you point the finger at? When there are flaws in ie there are stories on CNN.com and it is headline news. Since moz is not "mainstream" the only way to find a bug, privacy leak, ect are when it is to late. Again I am not starting a browser debate, I could care less. I am just pointing out a drawback of having an open source browser.

I am not saying MS admits their problems other developers, ect expose the 20 bugs and then it hits the news. I was not clear on open source.

[Pikeus]

My comment isn't meant to put one browser above the other either, it was meant to deride Microsoft.

IE makes headline news because there are so many bugs in the code, as is the case with most Microsoft apps. It has nothing to do with how widely used the browser is. What about the recent SSL issue, which was fixed almost instantly in Mozilla and Konqueror (Open Source browsers), and took ages for Microsoft to even admit that it was worth patching.

I would strongly suggest that you do some research before stating things that you don't even understand (as you admitted).

[jkd]

Originally posted by Pikeus
What about the recent SSL issue, which was fixed almost instantly in Mozilla and Konqueror (Open Source browsers), and took ages for Microsoft to even admit that it was worth patching.

Actually, Mozilla was never affected by it. It was strictly a problem with how Windows handles certificates (it extended beyond IE - Mozilla must use its own authentication), and with how Konqueror handled them.

[Pikeus]

Yes, you're right, it wasn't in Mozilla. But the problem was still fixed in Konqueror extremely quickly, and Konqueror is Open Source.

Looking at the current issue, if you want to compare it with what Microsoft would do, check out this article:

http://www.wired.com/news/print/0,1294,51899,00.html

I think that about sums up Microsoft's attitude.

[mouse]

Mozilla may not have privacy issues or allow people to take control but it can't consistently render a page properly... ever seen a hyperlink multiply itself on mouseover? Mozilla is never finished and it shows.

[jkd]

Show me a single valid page that it can't render but IE6 can.

[mouse]

Here's a piece of code: <a href="http://www.robotbooks.com/robot-motors.htm" target="_blank">Robotbooks.com</a>Simple huh?
Now here's how the most recent edition of Mozilla - 1.2 Alpha - does if you mouse over that hyperlink a few times:

http://silverpaw.robotguru.com/moz-fup.gif
http://www.robotguru.com if you'd like to see for yourself.

And as I post this Mozilla screws up again...

http://silverpaw.robotguru.com/moz-fup2.gif

I like the browser and use it all the time but it seems to mess up what appears to be legit code.

[jkd]

*sigh* before criticizing Mozilla, please understand their versions first.

Anything labelled Alpha really means alpha - if moz wasn't open-source, you'd probably never see it. It is simply released to start trying out new additions to the trunk. Even builds marked "Beta" to a lesser extent - the only Moz builds you should expect smooth surfing from are final releases... Moz 1.0.1, Moz 1.1, etc, which of course are what branded versions (such as NS7, which = Moz 1.0.1) should be based on.

[Mhtml]

well, this is certainly a heated post lol...I think Pikeus is exactly correct that it'd take MS a long time to admit it has something(s) wrong with any of it's products where less-known/endorsed programs are more likely to find and fix as quick as possible if they have any hopes of becoming a serious player in the virtual world.

Microsoft spends a lot more time in fixing bugs and things before it releases a product but less time than after it has been released because they are usually working on bringing out the next update for the program which updates multiple fixes, rather than working quicker to bring out a small patch for only a few issues.

Both browsers in this case have had there fair share of problems but if you ask me mozilla may be IEs biggest competitor one day, MS may have the money to buy there way to the top but mozzy I'm sure has the will power, because after all this is just a PR battle, which brings up what allida77 posted about being backed by aol time-warner...

As I have stated previously it is just a PR battle, when AOL and Time Warner merged it was the biggest merger ever, which means if mozz is backed by someone as big as aoltw then it will be able to compete with MS when it is big, when is complete, when it doesn't screw up.