[Steve]

Just days after Microsoft patched the last Critical flaw, yet another 'Extremely Critical' flaw in the Internet
Explorer browser has been notified by security researchers; this time it's the ActiveX component that's at risk - ActiveX enables a program to add functionality by calling ready-made components that blend in and appear as normal parts of the program and are typically used to add user interface functions, such as 3D toolbars, a notepad, calculator or even a spreadsheet.

As of now, there's no advisory from Microsoft about the issue, and we would advise that you use an alternative browser such as Firefox or Opera for routine web browsing.

If you wish to try out Firefox with the google toolbar (our preferred browser) we have links to it from our homepage (left handside column, square button)

[Dave]

Been using Firefox for a year now ...won't be going back to IE

[Foxesbrew]

This is interesting . I wqnder It explains the problem i had with the home page.Since i have usd Firefox ive had no more trouble.Thanks once again for all the help the crew dishout.

[Dave]

Without doubt. More & more sites are stating Firefox is their preferred browser, due to the quirks & problems with IE at the moment, plus understanding peoples concerns over internet security.

[Angela]

Sorry, I'm being really dense but I can't find the link to firefox on the home page.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Angela

Sorry, I'm being really dense but I can't find the link to firefox on the home page.

Currently it is the square silver button under the gallery thumbnail pictures at the bottom on the left hand side. Its says "Browse the Web faster, Get firefox with the google taskbar"

We are currently discussing changing its placement but for now thats where you will find it

[orangepeel]

Oh the irony...

Symantec lashes out at Firefox

and

Symantec slams Firefox again


trust me, symantec is no friend of microsoft.

Opera forever!

[Angela]

Still can't see it but, nevermind, I've just found it via Google and downloaded it!! Now to go check out Opera!

[Steve]

The Inquirer is know for spreading scare tactics and inaccuracies throughout the web and can hardly be called a source of sound and valid information. The way they report is testament to that. In the top article alone they refer to Firefox as many other things including...Firebadger, Fireferret, Firepossum and Mozzarella which is hardly a joking matter when we are talking about interent security and trying to help the less well informed internet users.

However they do also point out that...

There are some problems with the Symantec figures. The first is that it only reports flaws that have been confirmed by the vendor. Vole does not have to do this, and there is also a backlog of some 19 that Microsoft has to fix in comparison to only three for Firepossum.

I prefer to get my quality and trusted reports from here were there is no need for dramatic headlines, scare tactics or any hidden agendas

However I would recommend to all out users to try out both Firefox and Opera as they are both superior to IE and much safer overall. Use whichever suits you the best.

[orangepeel]

i particularly like the inq because they treat the IT industry with the respect it deserves - even their own advertisers. However I do understand peeps either love it or hate it.

I actually like their writing style tho, I like the humour in their articles an I like how they take no prisoners. I also like how they attack the fanboi crowd. The fact that mac, intel, amd, nvidia & ATi fanbois all tend to hate the inq tells you just how independant they are.

Maybe you can show examples of their hidden agenda rather than simply implying it's presence


What's interesting is the quote you give citing how the article is unreliable after announcing that the whole inq is unreliable

if I'd actually linked to the original articles
Symantec: Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE | CNET News.com
and
Symantec Offers Webcast Highlighting Findings of the Tenth Internet Security Threat Report

you may not have know about the way MS count their flaws. You can thank the inq for that

[Dave]

For peoples interest, here are the stats taken from hits this month to the Pixalo site, in terms of Browsers they use :-

- 60% Internet Explorer
- 35% Firefox
- 3% Safari
- 2% Opera
- 1% others

[Steve]

Originally Posted by orangepeel

i particularly like the inq because they treat the IT industry with the respect it deserves - even their own advertisers. However I do understand peeps either love it or hate it.

I actually like their writing style tho, I like the humour in their articles an I like how they take no prisoners. I also like how they attack the fanboi crowd. The fact that mac, intel, amd, nvidia & ATi fanbois all tend to hate the inq tells you just how independant they are.

And that’s fine as you are knowledgeable of the IT industry and an informed internet user, however the majority of the people using the web have very little idea about trogens, viruses, keyloggers, ActiveX components, VML exploits etc and to these people, the enquirers attitude is neither helpful nor informative. You and I can separate the useful and tabloid type information from that article because we have extensive internet and pc experience, others may not find that so easy.

Originally Posted by orangepeel

Maybe you can show examples of their hidden agenda rather than simply implying it's presence

Their agenda is to attract attention, be it through dramatic headlines or scare tactics as I already mentioned. The bigger the shock value the better it will be circulated around the web and the more visitors they will get as a result. It is simply called marketing. I am sure you don’t for one minute believe the enquirer posted that article to help people prevent malicious attacks through vulnerable browsers. You and I know that there are far more reliable sites already doing that.

Originally Posted by orangepeel

What's interesting is the quote you give citing how the article is unreliable after announcing that the whole inq is unreliable

I don’t see the problem with that, after all it is buried at the bottom of their article where it is least likely to be noticed and absorbed by the reader. If they were really concerned about their readers then this information would have been higher up to balance information. I merely pointed out that paragraph to balance the discussion for our members.

Originally Posted by orangepeel

if I'd actually linked to the original articles
Symantec: Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE | CNET News.com
and
Symantec Offers Webcast Highlighting Findings of the Tenth Internet Security Threat Report

you may not have know about the way MS count their flaws. You can thank the inq for that

It is a shame that you didn't link to those articles first as they are much more factual and useful to the casual reader.

I take my internet security very seriously, I am aware of the many vulnerabilities that have been discovered and (some) patched in IE. I am also aware that as a browser it doesn’t comply to the industry standards plus it’s the main targeted browser for hacks and attacks. Unfortunately on the whole MS only patch the security issues once a month. This is not the case for other browsers such as Firefox and the much less popular Opera, where critical patches are released much quicker and they are not as widely targeted. By definition that makes them a safer and better choice for those that are security conscious.

I like a good debate as much as the next man but this thread (about the latest IE browser security issue) is not the one to debate the enquirers writing style We seem to have taken it somewhat off topic.

If you wish to continue the debate lets start a new thread.