Unpatched Firefox v. Unpatched MS IE 6
Every browser has security holes. With lots of auto-installing spyware out there for Windows, it's hard to know which one is best. There's been blanket studies of number of bug fixes (Mozilla suite typically has 2-3x as many), time to fix bugs (MS IE typically takes 5-10x as long), etc... and they go back and forth.
But one of the BEST STUDIES I've now seen done is this one highlighted in
Information Week:
http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=179102695
Over 45,000 web sites hit, resulting in the following stastics:
- Default accept/install infection rate: 1.6% MS IE v. 0.09% Firefox
- Default REJECT/"drive-by-download" rate: 0.6% MS IE v.
ABSOLUTE ZERO Firefox!
It's that SECOND TEST that really shocked me! I could see how MS IE is 21x more suseptible to spyware because MS IE is far more popular, which explains the first test's results.
The problem with Windows and, coincidentally MS IE, has been the automation. For Microsoft to fix core issues with MS IE, they'd BREAK much of the automation that is the core of the OS. That's why even when the security is set high and the user REJECTS any install/download, there is still a 0.6% infection rate (under 300 for the 45,000 sample pages).
Out of over 45,000 web sites, UNPATCHED Firefox (on Windows) did
NOT one install a single piece of spyware or other malware automatically! This clearly tells me that with Firefox, YOU -- the user -- CONTROL what gets on your computer -- and NOT what Microsoft deems is a "necessary automation" or "low risk so not worth their bother."
Just a consideration for those of you still using MS IE.
thx
