<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mozilla Gains on IE</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/mozilla_gains_on_ie/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/mozilla_gains_on_ie/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 00:04:34 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: 42nd SSD</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/mozilla_gains_on_ie/comment-page-1/#comment-20136</link>
		<dc:creator>42nd SSD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Jul 2004 03:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=6786#comment-20136</guid>
		<description>Mozilla has a couple of huge advantages security-wise over IE. It&#039;s open source, which means a lot of programmers look at the code--and some specifically looking for security issues.  This is no guarantee of anything, of course (and many of the recent &quot;security vulnerabilities&quot; have more to do with user awareness of spoofed URLs than actual security issues with the software), but it makes it much less of an issue than a proprietary program.

Open source also means that when security problems are found, fixes will be forthcoming pretty quickly, typically much faster than M$ can respond.

The other benefit is that, indeed, it&#039;s not &quot;part of the operating system&quot;... IE has a huge number of mystery dependencies on other DLLs and parts of Windows, and the more complex an implementation is, the more likely it will have problems.

There&#039;s a myth that Windows has a lot of viruses merely because it&#039;s popular.  While that&#039;s true to a small extent, its lack of basic security features (in particular, most programs run with full privileges and memory protection is practically nonexistent) make even the tiniest flaws deadly.  In contrast, most Unices are (slowly) heading in the right direction, with network-accessible programs running with just the privileges they need and no more--and Unix-like OSes have had memory protection and a reasonably secure user model for many, many years.

One commercial browser alternative is Opera.  I&#039;m a big fan of it, but it&#039;s not for everyone...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mozilla has a couple of huge advantages security-wise over IE. It's open source, which means a lot of programmers look at the code--and some specifically looking for security issues.  This is no guarantee of anything, of course (and many of the recent "security vulnerabilities" have more to do with user awareness of spoofed URLs than actual security issues with the software), but it makes it much less of an issue than a proprietary program.</p>
<p>Open source also means that when security problems are found, fixes will be forthcoming pretty quickly, typically much faster than M$ can respond.</p>
<p>The other benefit is that, indeed, it's not "part of the operating system"... IE has a huge number of mystery dependencies on other DLLs and parts of Windows, and the more complex an implementation is, the more likely it will have problems.</p>
<p>There's a myth that Windows has a lot of viruses merely because it's popular.  While that's true to a small extent, its lack of basic security features (in particular, most programs run with full privileges and memory protection is practically nonexistent) make even the tiniest flaws deadly.  In contrast, most Unices are (slowly) heading in the right direction, with network-accessible programs running with just the privileges they need and no more--and Unix-like OSes have had memory protection and a reasonably secure user model for many, many years.</p>
<p>One commercial browser alternative is Opera.  I'm a big fan of it, but it's not for everyone...</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary and the Samoyeds</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/mozilla_gains_on_ie/comment-page-1/#comment-20128</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary and the Samoyeds</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2004 23:11:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=6786#comment-20128</guid>
		<description>Shhhhhhhhhhhhh!

If too many people start using it, the scumware writers WILL find a way to subvert it.  Sure, Firefox MAY be inherently less insecure than IE, but that doesn&#039;t mean it&#039;s SECURE.

Notice how few viruses, etc. attack Mosaic?  Do you think that&#039;s because it&#039;s so secure?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shhhhhhhhhhhhh!</p>
<p>If too many people start using it, the scumware writers WILL find a way to subvert it.  Sure, Firefox MAY be inherently less insecure than IE, but that doesn't mean it's SECURE.</p>
<p>Notice how few viruses, etc. attack Mosaic?  Do you think that's because it's so secure?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Timmer</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/mozilla_gains_on_ie/comment-page-1/#comment-20109</link>
		<dc:creator>Timmer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2004 18:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">/?p=6786#comment-20109</guid>
		<description>I just updated my post on the security issue to include a link to this.  Interesting stuff, but I think that a lot of folks had their IE go tango uniform when they did one of their updates...at least that&#039;s what I hear around these parts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just updated my post on the security issue to include a link to this.  Interesting stuff, but I think that a lot of folks had their IE go tango uniform when they did one of their updates...at least that's what I hear around these parts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
