 |
| Author |
Message |
thebrix
Mukhtar/is
Joined: 19 Aug 2005
Posts: 526
Location: London, United Kingdom
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
Erolz...
| Quote: |
| Look firefox is NOT spyware. It does NOT contain spyware. Nor does the firefox addon cooliris contain spyware. Neither is Alexa Toolbar spyware. |
You seem stuck on the word “spyware” and they’re not the only problems that can be introduced to a system from all these junk “utilities”. For example they could leave a port open through which they would send/receive info, install BHOs, insert entries into the host file, install and automate processes, modify IP addresses, etc, etc, etc, so…
I strongly advise you NOT to BROADCAST GUARANTEES to people, like you’re doing above, that such and such internet based software is “problem free” UNLESS YOU ARE THE AUTHOR AND BARE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES and never forget that it’s better for a user to be safe than sorry. |
Here we go again ... I think the problem is "define spyware". My definition of it off the top of my head is "functionality which transfers information from the user to a third party via the Internet, without the user's consent, which could not reasonably be expected to be transferred in a normal Internet transaction".
If a Firefox plugin transmitted information (about the Web sites you visit) to a third party * * *, as far as I am concerned it is spyware.
The plugin, by deliberate limitation of the languages it is written in, will not be able to - for example - traverse your hard disk, zip up all the Word and Excel files and transmit them to a server owned by someone in Evil Dictatorship <fill in dictator>, as malicious (Windows) programs have done in the past ... but it's the reader's call as to which leakage of information is "worse"!
As I pointed out earlier, anything which "connects to the Internet" must accept traffic going in both directions, by definition, so it would be impossible to stop a plugin from doing this. (I leave out technicalities about ports).
The * * * is because I originally put "without the knowledge of the user" as per my definition. However, I removed it because the licence boxes typically popped up on installation which tell you what the plugin does and doesn't do are beyond the comprehension of normal people and are probably legally unenforceable anyway ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
Erolz...
| Quote: |
| Look firefox is NOT spyware. It does NOT contain spyware. Nor does the firefox addon cooliris contain spyware. Neither is Alexa Toolbar spyware. |
You seem stuck on the word “spyware” and they’re not the only problems that can be introduced to a system from all these junk “utilities”. For example they could leave a port open through which they would send/receive info, install BHOs, insert entries into the host file, install and automate processes, modify IP addresses, etc, etc, etc, so… |
FFS firefox is NOT a JUNK UTILITY. It is the second most popular browser in the world after IE. If anything it is safer than using IE because it is the second most popular browser and not the first - and thus no subject to the same amount of people looking to exploit any security hole in it. Do not believe me ? - then try looking here
http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=179102695
| Quote: |
| Internet Explorer users can be as much as 21 times more likely to end up with a spyware-infected PC than people who go online with Mozilla's Firefox browser, academic researchers from Microsoft's backyard said in a recently published paper. |
You chuck around your geek speak and you do not even know what firefox is !!!!
| Get Real! wrote: |
I strongly advise you NOT to BROADCAST GUARANTEES to people, like you’re doing above, that such and such internet based software is “problem free” UNLESS YOU ARE THE AUTHOR AND BARE FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES and never forget that it’s better for a user to be safe than sorry.
Alternatively, you might want to post the tests you’ve conducted that prove your absolute claims, and even then it would have to go through the tests of others before approval/acceptance by the relevant technical online community. |
I do not tell people something is safe without doing some research. Cooliris previews is rated as 'spyware free' here
https://addons.mozilla.org/mozilla/2207/
and here
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Internet/Search-engine-tools-submiting/Cooliris-Previews.shtml
and here
http://www.snapfiles.com/get/cpreviews.html
and here
http://firefoxpro.net/2006/10/18/cooliris-previews-19/
and countless other places. But clearly YOU (who does not even know what firefox is) know better than all these sites ?
| Get Real! wrote: |
Actually, I sometimes DO advise some customers to obstruct internet connection from some of their systems; it was only last week when a server at a Dentist reception had its static IP address modified by an attack to point to a site on the internet and as a result all clients couldn’t access the dental software sitting on the server and the culprit was a new receptionist girl who saw fit to install Yahoo Messenger, Yahoo Toolbar, Mozilla/Firefox? Thunderbird and guess what… she somehow caught one of the CoolWebSearch variants (very intelligent and nasty family) that did all the damage. Guess how I safeguarded the company after removing all the above junk? It was a tough decision, it took me a whole 10 seconds to decide but it had to be done... no more Internet for the poor girl; now she’ll be twiddling her thumbs when there’s no customers around. |
Well firstly I wouldn’t let anyone who confuse firefox / mozilla with gozilla within 100 yards of my system.
Secondly of COURSE you can make a pc secure from internet security risk by not allowing it to connect to the internet. So what ? Is that then your advice HERE to people using this forum ? Do not connect to the internet at all - unless you write all your own sw - tp/ip stack, browser email client etc etc etc. Patent nonsense.
| Get Real! wrote: |
“Good information” defends systems from attacks? Did you learn that doing your MCSE?  |
Of course good information helps people protect their systems. It is common sense and a lot more useful that saying 'everything is dangerous , nothing can be trusted, best do not connect at all' - especially when this is being said to try and cover up a mistake like thinking firefox/mozilla are p2p programs. Saying that firefox and mozilla are p2p programs is NOT good information. Saying that a given add on to these browsers can only be considered safe if I am the author of the software is NOT good information. Saying that a web browser is a 'junk utility' is NOT good information.
Look GR you messed up right at the start. You confused mozilla with gozilla and then lumped in firefox as well - but rather than accept this mistake (which is glaring to anyone who supposed job is protecting peoples systems) , you try to go on an insist that your initial warning based on this TOTALLY INCORRECT premise was in fact a useful and helpful warning.
Firefox does not contain spyware. The cooliris preview add on does not contain spyware. No sw is 100% safe from vulnerabilities - but if you are going to use the internet then you will need a browser and as browsers go firefox is widely regarded as SAFER than IE. All your scaremongering is in fact based on your false initial assertion that firefox and mozilla are p2p programs. Just admit your mistake without trying to prove that this gross initial mistake of yours makes any difference to what your said - which was WRONG. |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| thebrix wrote: |
Here we go again ... I think the problem is "define spyware". My definition of it off the top of my head is "functionality which transfers information from the user to a third party via the Internet, without the user's consent, which could not reasonably be expected to be transferred in a normal Internet transaction". |
Alistair by ANY (reasonable) definition of spyware , firefox, mozilla or the add on cooliris preview do NOT CONTAIN SPYWARE. That is the (relevant) point to me.
| thebrix wrote: |
If a Firefox plugin transmitted information (about the Web sites you visit) to a third party * * *, as far as I am concerned it is spyware. |
Yes I agree if it does this (without informed consent imo) then it would be spyware but cooliris previews does NOT do this. Nor does firefox or mozilla for that matter.
There are more than enough REAL risk for people to worry about without being told that things that do not contain spyware do, or probably do , by badly informed 'experts' on internet forum imo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Get Real!
Warnings : 3
Senior Villager
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 325
Location: Nicosia
|
|
Erolz, you are starting to bore me shitless because…
You are clearly an amateur computer user judging by your lack of technical expression and seemingly fervent support for 3rd party home user (read junk) utilities. You confuse your limited home user experience with what’s regarded acceptable or unacceptable in the commercial IT world.
The equipment, software, licensing, methodologies, standards, procedures, and ethics in the corporate world are miles apart from what you’re use to so I honestly think you should keep a low profile when it comes to technical IT matters, AND PARTICULARLY INTERNET SECURITY, and just because you scored a brownie point earlier over a Mozilla-Gozilla error doesn’t mean that you should now embark on a hard-headed destructive campaign of making a total fool of yourself with a premature ejaculation running down your pants.
Now get over it because you’re becoming a nuisance in an area you’re obviously NOT qualified. |
|
| Back to top |
|
city
Site Admin
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 3423
Location: Larnaca area
|
|
GR, I will not jump into the technical part of this discussion. But I can tell you that I do know in which cases I have to be careful when installing new SW/add-ons/whatever and in which cases I am ok in doing so. For this I do not need to know each technical detail.
As I hope you know the Mozilla Foundation is an open source community of developers and testers and thus their SW is by definition (imho) safer then any other commercial product.
Apart from that I would appreciate you watching your language.
On a side note: Erolz is the person who set up, runs, maintains and protects this forum here. So I suggest you think about what you are saying re. his IT capabilities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
| You are clearly an amateur computer user judging by your lack of technical expression and seemingly fervent support for 3rd party home user (read junk) utilities. You confuse your limited home user experience with what’s regarded acceptable or unacceptable in the commercial IT world. |
I do not throw around 'technical expressions' in this forum because it is not a technical forum. What I AM concerned with is that the user of this forum get good information that they can understand. Nor am I interested in having a 'pissing contest' with you about my technical expertise.
What is regarded as acceptable in a commercial IT world is not relevant to the users here or germane to this thread that was a about a specific add on to a specific set of web browsers.
You seem determined to try and mislead the users of this forum into thinking that this specific add or the browsers it runs on are liable to contain sypware / malware or something similar and the fact is they do not. I can not see any reason why you continue to insist this other than some sort of ego driven determination to cover what was a mistake on your part.
Is it dangerous for users to willy nilly install any piece of sw on their machine with no regard for what that sw does ? Of course it is dangerous to do this. Is it dangerous to install this SPECIFIC add or the browsers that it runs on. NO IT IS NOT.
For the record I am neither a fervent supporter of 3rd party utilities nor am I a hater of such. Some can be useful. Some can be unsafe. When city recommended this , after first doing some simple checks on the net I downloaded it and tried. Personally it does little for me and the way I use my browser. That however is not the point. The point is some may well find this a useful utility, as city clearly does. Why then should these people be bamboozled by you into thinking that it will put spyware onto their systems when it will not, just because you made a mistake and now you can not back down?
| Get Real! wrote: |
The equipment, software, licensing, methodologies, standards, procedures, and ethics in the corporate world are miles apart from what you’re use to so I honestly think you should keep a low profile when it comes to technical IT matters, AND PARTICULARLY INTERNET SECURITY, and just because you scored a brownie point earlier over a Mozilla-Gozilla error doesn’t mean that you should now embark on a hard-headed destructive campaign of making a total fool of yourself with a premature ejaculation running down your pants. |
What I am concerned with here, is that the normal, average, non corporate, non technical expert users of this forum are not mislead or misinformed about the safety of the specific add on that City recommended to the forums users. If I am hard headed its because my ethics dictate that stopping you misinformation of users on this forum is more important to me that nursing your ego. I actually tried to be very 'gentle' in my original suggestion that your post was incorrect and thus your conclusion was also incorrect. But you clearly were not having it.
| Get Real! wrote: |
Now get over it because you’re becoming a nuisance in an area you’re obviously NOT qualified. |
Again I really am not interested in having a pissing contest with you about who knows more about computers, the internet, internet security or IT in general. All I am concerned about is that bad information is not passed off to others in the forum that I run. If you want to start a thread about the dangers on the internet and the dangers of add on programs in general - then please start a thread on the subject. THIS thread was about a specific add on to firefox / mozilla browsers and you gleefully jumped right in saying that the add on and or the browers it ran on almost certainly contained spyware (because p2p programs often do - yet none of them are p2p programs anyway). You clearly could not even be bothered to google firefox or mozilla or the add on itself before sharing your 'ethical corporate' wisdom on the saftey of THESE pieces of sw - nor did you care about making city look like she was recommending unsafe sw to users here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mete
Warnings : 3
Deputy
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1150
Location: Boston
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
You are clearly an amateur computer user judging by your lack of technical expression and seemingly fervent support for 3rd party home user (read junk) utilities. You confuse your limited home user experience with what’s regarded acceptable or unacceptable in the commercial IT world.
|
You don't have to be a Computer Scientist to realize that Firefox and the plugin mentioned, in no shape or form, is or contains spyware. You obviously gave the wrong information and you're too proud to admit it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Mete
Warnings : 3
Deputy
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1150
Location: Boston
|
|
| I installed this too. Works pretty good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Get Real!
Warnings : 3
Senior Villager
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 325
Location: Nicosia
|
|
Citty...
| Quote: |
| On a side note: Erolz is the person who set up, runs, maintains and protects this forum here. So I suggest you think about what you are saying re. his IT capabilities. |
That’s like telling an Astronaut that someone who fires hobby rockets in their back yard should not have their knowledge of "rocket science" taken lightly!
I do understand you being impressed with a BBS but some of us are former sysops from the Fidonet era (mid 80s) running TBBS systems (hot stuff in its days) at a time when most in here didn’t even know what a computer looked like, and have since moved on to bigger and better things… |
|
| Back to top |
|
Get Real!
Warnings : 3
Senior Villager
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 325
Location: Nicosia
|
|
Mete…
| Quote: |
| You obviously gave the wrong information and you're too proud to admit it. |
Read my THIRD response to Erolz in this thread and then if you’re brave enough to admit YOUR error as I was, come back and post your apology.
Thank you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Get Real!
Warnings : 3
Senior Villager
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 325
Location: Nicosia
|
|
Erolz, you're incorrigible...
TWO professionals so far have informed you why you shouldn’t be so absolute in your opinions regarding Firefox and I also posted a link where people from around the world are arguing over this issue on a forum. You seem to underestimate the power of a browser on a system and how that power can be easily abused by such software.
You have also failed to conduct ANY tests OF YOUR OWN to prove your claims and opted to post links in favor of Firefox, some of which belong to the owners/authors/distributors of the product itself!
I can understand that you may not have the time to download, install, and test Firefox, so how about you explain in a post HOW one can go about testing if a program like Firefox is indeed playing up behind the scenes.
Surely a man of your calibre who can make such big claims is able to put 2-3 lines together and EXPLAIN to us the methodology required because in OUR industry…
…ACTION talks and bullshit walks! |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
Citty...
That’s like telling an Astronaut that someone who fires hobby rockets in their back yard should not have their knowledge of "rocket science" taken lightly!
|
GR you are the astronaut that confused venus and pluto with plutonium, warned all us non experts out there to be wary of pluto and venus because they are radioactive and then when your mistake was pointed out to you went on to insist that radioactivity exists everywhere , and nothing is safe from the dangers of radioactivity, venus and pluto included. |
|
| Back to top |
|
erolz
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Aug 2005
Posts: 4211
Location: Kyrenia / Girne
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
Erolz, you're incorrigible...
TWO professionals so far have informed you why you shouldn’t be so absolute in your opinions regarding Firefox and I also posted a link where people from around the world are arguing over this issue on a forum. You seem to underestimate the power of a browser on a system and how that power can be easily abused by such software. |
Once again I have never said that firefox is absolutely safe and that if you use it you will be immune from any security risk. What I have said is that firefox does not itself contain any spyware and I have said this because it is TRUE. I have also said that the add on that city recommended - cooliris preview also does not contain any spyware , again because this is TRUE.
I personally do not favor firefox over IE. I use both on my system. I do not personally recommend either over the other to those that seek my opinions on the matter. I accept that both constitute a degree of security risk as does ANY piece of sw on your machine - especially sw related to external communications to and from that machine. I generally accept the consensus expert view that firefox, whilst not totally safe (nothing is or ever can be) , is in general terms safer than IE in terms of it becoming a target or vector for infection by malicious code. However none of this is relevant to the thread which was about a specific add on to the firefox / mozilla browsers and became about if they contained spyware or not after you post suggesting they probably did (because they were according to you p2p programs and many p2p programs do contain spyware and thus the add on and the browsers should be considered suspect.)
I really have had enough of this. Cooliris preview does not contain spyware. Firefox does not contain spyware. It really is that simple. |
|
| Back to top |
|
pg
Deputy
Joined: 17 Jan 2006
Posts: 1485
Location: Cyprus
|
|
| Get Real! wrote: |
…ACTION talks and bullshit walks!
|
Dear GR, I think the main problem is not that you are rude and uninformed, but that you do not seem to realize that this is the fact - on most subjects you engage in.
Last edited by pg on Mon Feb 19, 2007 11:45 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Crash Test Dummy
Warnings : 3
Ministerial
Joined: 25 Sep 2005
Posts: 4941
Location: London(ish)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
All times are GMT + 3 Hours
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
|
| Page 2 of 3 |
| |
 
 
Link Partners
605118 Attacks blocked
|
Register 
Log in 
Album 
Home 