Thanks polonus, Finjan seems OK, even better than SiteAdvisor!
This is my personal preference but I donât use Distrust and Stealther, instead, I simply turn off history, hard disk cache and password manager through options and about:config for speed and privacy.
No. Anyone who actually browsed a bit with NoScript would see the difference. He/she could check what is blocked by the indicator at the bottom of the page rather than annoying prompts and decide what to do with the blocked scripts. He/she could temporally allow them and/or put them to whitelist. This kind of whitelisting in IE is much more troublesome. In fact, in my routine browsing, I donât need to touch anything while I can choose what I would do with new sites. For example, here, Bob appears to have seen something he wouldnât like to see but I didnât because the browser didnât read scripts. Of course, domain-based blocking is not perfect since âtrustedâ ones may be contaminated but NoScript author is aware of it and I take my precautions, too.
I follow this.
For these ones, rests the antivirus and Script Blocker (Pro version for IE).
Well, a big indicator that you are talking to someone who is pretending to be knowledgeable about computers is when they start drawing vague analogies, about âcars and seatbeatsâ⌠They think it makes them sound clever, when in fact it merely shows they lack the technical chops to explain what is happeningâŚ
It looks like no one can have his own opinion in this forum. After one say something, there is at least two on his back. I don't like it and I don't use it, so what's wrong with that ?
Nothing wrong. Except a couple of people here think they are the only guys who know anything and that anyone who disagrees with them must be wrong or foolishâŚ
Do you really think that Sasha do not have technical skills?
Câmon master, is it funny to be a troll in the forum?
Youâre the first one? Whoâs the second?
Very funny. I second Techâs comment. Sasha know his stuff. Being able to boil technical concepts down to simple analogies, is a skill in itself.
Thereâs probably a bit of truth in your statement, but not necessarily in the way you meant it. There are a lot of people who frequent this forum, that have a lot of knowledge about computer security. It is inevitable that there would be disagreements sometimes in threads, but the benefit to the original poster, is that he has more than one option to pick from. A good thing in my mind.
There have been instances in the past, where members have gone into a feeding frenzy in response to someoneâs posted question, and as a collective group, they resemble the Keystone Kops, but those have been few and far between.
As an interested spectator, Iâm personally impressed, and humbled by the collective knowledge of the members here.
Can we keep on track please, arguing over what seems to me like nothing seems pointless guys.
âlee
Lee, weâre interested on forum atmosphere⌠we need air to breath. Respect, in one word.
In case you missed the newsâŚ
[QUOTE]Mozilla Says Firefox 3 Ready For Prime Time
The programâs creators told Reuters on Thursday that the privately-held companyâs trial version of Firefox 3 browser is ready for the masses to use after months of development.
Until now, the company has discouraged average Internet users from moving on from Firefox 2, which was launched in October 2006.
âIn many ways it (Firefox 3) is much more stable than anything else out there,â Mozilla Corp Vice President of Engineering Mike Schroepfer said in an interview.
[/quote]
http://www.internetnews.com/breakingnews/article.php/3735786
FF3 might be ready for the masses, but I doubt the extensions are ready for FF3, many wil not be compatoble.
Siteadcisor is one ;D
Thatâs true, though many are. Some developers wonât update until a RC. But, the only two Iâm really concerned about are NoScript, and AdBlock Plus, and both of them have been updated. Though I donât, you can have both versions installed side-by-side if the extensions are a big deal. Probably more concern for some extensions on Windows, than on Linux. I canât rememberâŚ
Hi DavidR,
There is a way around that to make some critical extensions run inside FF:
http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=33717.0
Some hang to certain security add-ons. SiteAdvisor for me is not one of them. There are better alternatives.
But I would not like to miss for instance DrWebâs av hyperlink scanner plug-in, Stealther, JSView, Error Console, R.I.P. to mention just a few. And not to forget the most important of them all NoScript. I would not like to touch FF or Flock without Mr. Maoneâs extension -
polonus
As I mentioned in the post right above yours, NoScript is working fine.
Personally I would rather not modify firefox and wait for the official release and the support for my extensions. I have in the past hacked the extension where it was no longer supported, changing the from and to version support. but that effects only one particular extension and doesnât disable compatibility checking for all extensions.
Thatâs always the prudent choice. My reason for posting the news, was to simply let people know, who are biting at the bit to try FF3, that they shouldnât be afraid to try it, even with itâs Beta designation.
I began to use Firefox 3 Portable. I simply copied profile folder under âFirefoxPortableTest\Dataâ but it works fine with some minor tweaks. As for add-ons, beside the add-on compatibility check workaround polonus mentioned, check the add-on developersâ sites for newer versions of their add-ons. For example, I found Tab Max Plus dev-builds here. This is one of my must-have add-ons and 0.3.6.1.080324 works well with FF3 at the moment. About FF3, itself, I like âthe feelâ when I am browsing, it definitely feels lighter.
Good review here (as in good for Firefox):
Hi users of FF,
Beta5 will be out in May, you can test the RC1, FF 3.0 will be out somewhere in June:
http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9072680&intsrc=hm_list
RCâs can be tested, and developers like to get the feed-back from it,
polonus