Stop Exploring: Consider browser alternatives

About a month ago, I decided to move users to Firefox as quickly as possible, and have already done that on over half of our 170 computers. A few departments use software that requires IE to work properly, so IE cannot be disabled on their systems, but for many users this is not an issue. No complaints so far.

We chose Mozilla because it offered the best level of security and compatibility for our users. We used Internet logs to find the top sites visited by our users. Those sites were then tested on a group of alternate browsers for compatibility. The winner, Mozilla was then deployed for two weeks to some of our power users (to see if they could live with it). Security logs were also reviewed on the Mozilla stations in detail. After the trial none of the Mozilla work stations showed any Mal-ware or Spy ware. The results were very positive and the product was deployed to all Internet clients.

Once again, very helpful.

Firefox 0.9 (One Tree Hill) is what I use but I noticed that MS update will not work in Firefox 0.9.

I basically need both but use Firefox 0.9 most of the time and when things don't work switch to IE. I'm waiting for the fall-out from SP2 update before I update but have no idea if SP2 fixed any security in IE.

I would love to move my users to Mozilla, but most of our computers are for public use, and therefore require a lot of administrative control for security purposes. Therefore, we use group policy to lock down the public users. Does anyone know of a way to have that same administrative control with a browser other than IE?

If the organization wants to disable IE, that is fine with me. I really don't care what browser is used. However, there IS a way to remove IE without crippling the Windows operating system.

Yes, doing bogus proxies can slow stop the internet and if you lock the IE controls then you slow down users from getting IE working.... But if you are going to do away with IE, why not go all the way.
I found a neat little utility called IEradicator and safely removed IE from the OS and there were no issues at all. Infact, I believed it actually help the performance of the OS.
just do a google search for IEradicator and download the utility and run it. It does great and removes IE.

When I use Netscape or Opera (even when set to lie that Opera is IE 6) the download from the MS download page fails.

How does one address this issue if IE is disabled completely?

-- David Teague

I may have not been clear about Windows Update and getting rid of IE. Let me try again.

The Windows Update Service will function and automatically download the updates if you follow the steps outlined. Windows Automatic Update Service has no dependency upon the settings of IE or the connection manager.

With your Windows Update Service configured properly, you'll never need to use IE to browse to the windows update site again.

You can always create a different Group Policy that applies to your workstation support personnel, that allows them to use IE for obtaining workstation updates.

Mike Mullins
Security Solutions

I decided to make myself the guinea pig for Firebox before inflicting it on our network. I have to say, I'm pretty impressed; installation was flawless, as was migrating over all my Favorites (now Bookmarks) etc. Added Flash & Shockwabe plugins without a hitch, and so far only encountered one minor bug - which I was also able to find a fix for immediately.

I will try it probably for a week or so, but I feel confident I will be deploying Firefox for the rest of our users this month.

What about Firefox's remote XUL exploit problem?
AND the SSL spoofing issues discovered July 26?

I think Yahoo must be using activeX controls to make their HTML GUI work. Try crazyBrowser or Opera. I think..... they are based on an IE codebase, and Yahoo might work on them.

Does that mean that they are open to the same problems that IE is? Maybe, but maybe not.

IE has something I use quite a lot: Temporary Internet Files.
I rush through my surfing/research and then go through and read the web pages offline at leisure. I don't know where Netscape stores the files (if at all). Opera stores but renames the files in its cache, making it very difficult to retrieve the original urls. I have not yet tried Firefox.

Armies usually disguise their vehicles rather than advetising them in bright colours.
If you use a full Windows package, you are displaying a Windows logo on the Net in full technicolour and making your self a target for attack.
The easy bits to dump are IE, Outlook, Exchange and IIS. Alternatives cost zilch.
4 years ago, I got away with 18 months on the Net without virus protection!
I now have SW firewalling, a registered domain and a 24/7 connection and can see from the various logs that attacks against the listed components are frequent (e.g. Apache logs about 6 attacks a week against IIS).

We wouold love to switch from IE to some other product like Firefox. Problem is that MS being narrow minded as they are, seems to think that the only way you are going to get your system updates easily is to force you to use IE. We are actually looking for a way to change the mime headers on update request to MS using Firefox to lie to the system and make it think it is talking to IE.
IE is to big a risk to continue using. MS has been unable to fix this product and it has been out a long time. Maybe they should give the code to the Open Source folks, maybe they can fix it for MS.

Especially in the backroom.

I would never trust MS products where security or stability matters.

With a little bit of effort to learning something new - understanding that MS makes choices for you, therefore providing ignorance and not inspired achievement - I've migrated to true lightout operations and achieved capacity and introduced additional functionality that would have emptied my walet for, time-after-time, to obtain otherwise.

This especially in regard to mail systems, proxies, and web servers.

I'm quite satisfied with Safari. I used to use Mozilla when I was stuck with a PC environment, but I did not find it to be reliable. Its MTBF was about 10-20 hours, although they were paying attention and that interval was increasing noticeably.

I should be clear by now that the total attention span focused on a product has a direct correlation on its "perceived security." There are too many examples of safe, proven, or tested systems that started to fail as soon as more attention was focused on them. If any company's products received as much attention as Microsoft, I believe they would look just as bad. Microsoft incorporates a great deal of functionality into its products. This creates greater opportunity to exploits. Code cand be used for both good and evil. I remember Novell telling me I could not have extended workstation functionality, like e-mail back in the early 90's. Microsoft continues to dominate the market because they support their legacy products and they always provide the most flexibility. As far as security goes, the more people try to tear a product down. The stronger it becomes. I will go with the development team that has to fight everyday rather than the team that simply "knows what to do." In the long run, I am safer with those whose knowledge is obtained from the front lines, not in the general's quarters.

I really haven't tried other Browsers but I find this one good because I has a pop-up blocker but I don't know about security issues; I haven't found any malware or spyware on my PC after I installed it, what you do you guys thinks about Avant Browser?

Historically (for the last 24 years), my policy has been to never play with application software newer than a 1.1 release unless involved in a formal beta program.

The security threats implicit in the MS proprietary API's and extensions embedded in IE since v3.5 necessarily embed vulnarabilities that are now so menacing to my clients' infrastructure that I have been deploying Firefox since v0.6(!).
IR v6 is especially rank with tattleware support. What possible justification could there be for enabling 'on demand' remote execution of any code on any end-user's machine?! MS's insipid mantra about commercial value-added benefits is simply abusive to naive users and way over the heads of most MCSE evangelists I've ever encountered.

We've found Firefox to be remarkably stable since v0.8 and the new v0.9 is actually 1/3 the code size of previouse releases.

Internet usage policy at all my client sites is to use Firefox as the default browser and to only use IE when they encounter a site that requires some MS specific feature found only in IE.

Apparently, U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security is now recommending the same policy as reported in the 19 July issue of EWEEK magazine on p.31.

Joe Tocci
President, Superuser Inc.

I moved from IE a long time ago. Although I still have it installed, it's rarely used. Only for some updates. I have Firefox, Netscape, Mozilla and Opera and all appear to provide more control than does IE. IE always seems to "magically" install stuff (crap) that's not required. It integrates Yahoo, AOL and all that stuff. I prefer to have installed what "I" want on my machine, not what MS thinks I need. I only keep it around to laugh at it. I feel I control my machine and refuse to let MS try to. It's awful enough already...

We have public access computers at the library. I'm using K-meleon with the latest Java plugin. It is easy to customize. I've locked it down pretty tight. So far the only complaints are from script kiddies and gamers.

My organisation runs about 500 PCs all using IE6. Half the PCs are available to the general public and are locked down by software on the PCs, Group policies and the network (proxying, ACLs etc.

All of the PCs run antivirus software and we have a regular patch program. In the near future we intend to set up an update server.

We have had no problems with IE since we had IE5 years ago. We recently DID get a trojan but it had nothing to do with IE. It got in through an OS exploit and our AV provider didn't update in time to save us.

Seems to me IE is secure enough if you put some effort in. And besides, I have no confidence that any software is invulnerable to hacking. The number of IE installations makes it a big target but also ensure that the world quickly becomes aware of problems, and MS reacts pretty well. Maybe some of the software with smaller installed bases are safer for now, but when they are hacked, how quickly will the cavalry arrive?

I think there is a big problem in the IT world with anti-MS sentiment being paraded as good technical sense. I remain to be convinced.

I use firefox only and I never got any pop-up, you can deny cookies and it's so much faster!

I use the Opera Web Browser ver: 7.54. The feature of using "Mouse gestures" is great and no other browser currently has it. It browses almost all sites I have tried except for www.optonline.net's web mail, and certain Microsoft web pages. Other than that, it's fast, comes with a built in mail client, among many other features.

I highly recommend Opera to everyone who asks this question.

First of all, one of the biggest beefs that I have with the Linux distributions is the fact that they have hundreds of application, that all do the same thing. They just need to get off the crack and just build one application that can handle all the tasks that the hundreds of application do.
Second, you can't disable Internet Explorer. They have built it into the the file explorer, the help system, and generally any application that browses the web weither built by Microsoft or using Microsoft's Visual Studio. The Web browser component is Internet Explorer.
Third, I believe that the only truely secure application is one that all programmers have written at one point, Hello World. The other browser's more than likely have security holes as well, just that nobody really uses them, and Internet Explorer is installed on every useable computer on the planet.

I wouldn't consider switching at this time. I don't have the time to support teaching everyone a new browser. I'm spending my time on improving our workflow systems and BI systems, don't have time to do anything else right now.

I can automate updates to IE and Windows. I'd have to manage updates to Firefox. Can't support that at this time.

Once it has an auto-update function, and has a few ease-of-transition issues fixed, then maybe. Till then, I have better and more important things to spend my time on.