You seem to be suggesting a huge number of settings. I submit the
average user will only get confused.

The amazing number of settings of IE that you mention doesn't convince
me -- it looks to me more like MS is trying to intimidate users.

If you want the user to disable this or that feature before entering a
site, fine. On the other hand, why should the user even need to know
about this or that feature in the computer world.

Stephan


On Sat, 19 Feb 2005 15:03:37 +0100, Anthony G. Atkielski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At this early stage of Firefox public development, it might be a good
> time to define a flexible model for controlling exactly what can and
> cannot be done in the browser by Web pages and sites.
> 
> Microsoft Internet Explorer had a few interesting controls that allowed
> some individualization of control, but it didn't go far enough.  Firefox
> has a few controls as well, but it doesn't even go as far as MSIE,
> whereas it should be going even farther in order to improve security.
> 
> For example, consider these suggestions:
> 
> - Firefox should define a generous number of security categories into
> which sites can be grouped, ranging from fully trusted to fully
> untrusted.  There should be security settings for each category
> appropriate to its level by default, but it should be possible to modify
> the settings for any category to any degree.
> 
> - The settings for each category should cover every single issue that
> might present a security risk, from the simple display of images to the
> exact identities of active components or plug-ins that are allowed to
> execute, with separate control for downloading (I personally don't like
> the idea of ActiveX or anything like it at all, but I imagine the market
> will force accommodation of something like this in time).  It must be
> possible to enable or disable Java, Javascript, active content
> (preferably by individual module), and anything else that might open a
> door on the local machine.  It should be possible to lockdown the
> browser so tightly that it can barely display anything beyond plain
> text.
> 
> - It should be possible to specify which sites are in which categories.
> A default configuration can be provided, and the user should be able to
> modify this in any desired way. The list of sites for each category
> should allow not only specific FQDNs for sites, but also resource
> indicators (http vs. https, ftp, mailto, etc.).  Some sort of wildcard
> provisions must be made as well: domain.com means "only the URL
> domain.com," *.domain.com means "anything in domain.com or a subdomain
> of domain.com," and so on.  It should be possible to specify both FQDNs
> and numeric IP addresses.
> 
> - Some provision for saving and loading the security configuration
> should be provided, so that users can load packaged configurations
> and/or save configurations they have prepared.  It should also be
> possible to load partial modifications (modifying the security settings
> for only one category, etc.).  None of these actions should be possible
> from within a Web page--it must not be something that a dishonest site
> could do via a Web page, in other words.
> 
> These enhancements would be a huge step forward for security and would
> largely eliminate the problems of adware, spyware, viruses, etc., since
> conscientious users could lock down their Firefox browser to any desired
> degree.
> 
> After using Firefox for a few weeks now, I think the only real
> hesitation I have in abandoning MSIE is the lack of features such as
> I've outlined above.  MSIE is far from ideal, but it still provides more
> granular control over security than Firefox does.  But if Firefox begins
> to provide the same control or better, there will be no real reason to
> retain MSIE for anything.
> 
> BTW, I personally don't care if Firefox ever allows anything like
> ActiveX.  I've never encountered a site that had a truly serious and
> legitimate need to use ActiveX controls, and I think the Web would be
> better off without them.  That includes Flash.
> 
> --
> Anthony
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mozilla-security mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-security
>
_______________________________________________
Mozilla-security mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-security

Reply via email to