• IE 7 Less Vulnerable than Firefox 2?

    IE 7 Less Vulnerable than Firefox 2?

    Techtree News Staff, Nov 23, 2006 1706 hrs IST

    Mozilla Firefox 2 and Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 (IE) are both vulnerable to a bug that steals the login-id and password of users...

    mail share

According to reports, Mozilla Firefox 2 and Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 (IE) are both vulnerable to a bug that steals the login-id and password of users, with the help of a fake log-in page.

The bug has been dubbed as "Reverse Cross Site Request vulnerability" (RCSR) by Robert Chapin, who first discovered the flaw.

Reportedly, the attack was first carried out from a profile page using a specially crafted HTML that hides the genuine MySpace content from the page, and displays the fake login page instead. The fake page is then sent to another Web site, along with information regarding MySpace users who visited the page using Firefox.

The attacks seen on My Space.com are likely to move on to Firefox as well because the Firefox Password Manager automatically enters any saved passwords and user-id/s into the form, whereas IE is not capable of filling in the saved information automatically.

Therefore, Firefox is more likely to get affected by the flaw, as compared to IE.

According to Chapin, users of both Firefox and IE need to be aware that their information can be stolen in this way when visiting blog and forum Web sites at trusted addresses as well. Further, an RCSR attack is more likely to succeed than an XSS attack because neither IE nor Firefox are designed to check the destination of form data before the user submits them.

Moreover, the browser doesn't indicate the exploitation as it is conducted on a trusted Web site.

As of now, no fix has been issued by Mozilla, and it's not very clear if the other versions of Firefox are also affected by the flaw. Users have been advised to disable the "Remember passwords for sites" from the preference link in Firefox.

Additionally, these attacks could also be highly effective against firewall of local network servers and HTTPS addresses that are not otherwise accessible because the attacker does not need direct access.

Follow Techtree on Twitter



Discussion Board
(29) Comments
жо&
,NY, on Nov 21, 2007 05:33 PM
хер тебе в рыло - сраный урод!!! her tebe v rylo - sranyi urod!!!
LARRY G
,WAUKESHA, on Nov 23, 2006 07:39 PM
i AM ONE OF THE "BLACK HELICOPTER" GROUP THAT BELIEVES MICROSOFT USES ie TO TRACK EVERYWHERE THE OPERATOR GOES. i ENJOY READING COMPARISON ARTICLES. hOWEVER, WHEN IT COMESTO TRUST, FIREFOX IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO! tHE MAIN VALUE OF ie IS ACCESS TO UPDATES.
UnHoly
,Miami, on Nov 26, 2006 09:55 AM
Is today opposite cAPSLOCK dAY lARRY? hehe.. lay off the booze brotha!
жо&
,NY, on Nov 21, 2007 05:29 PM
хер тебе в рыло - сраный урод
pat
,Anchorage Alaska, on Jan 06, 2007 11:00 AM
i'm sort of lost, was trying to find out what (amyours2.com ment) saw it on some e-mail and was trying to track down a person's screen name & e-mail address. Are there ways to do this?? Help Please Pat
Senthil Kumar
,Chennai, on Nov 23, 2006 08:27 PM
With the new threat made public, if it is big enough, sure Microsoft will release an update. But I think that if users are careful with auto-fill kinda features, they can possibly avoid entering data into false web pages.
gffff
,ds, on Nov 30, 2006 04:26 PM
kynbe
gffff
,ds, on Nov 30, 2006 04:24 PM
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
Andrew
,US, on Nov 23, 2006 07:13 PM
This is nothing new we already knew IE was more secure than FF in 2006: www.FirefoxMyths.com
your moma
,somehwere, on Nov 24, 2006 01:24 PM
1st, if you think ie is more secure than ff you are a moron. 2nd this article is just another msp (microsoft propaganda) article, i mean they are saying FF is more vulnerable since it can save passwords...what the hell does that mean. they are both vulnerable, the same..I cant really tell the diff between microsofts and morons these days
zimmer
,London, on Nov 24, 2006 07:42 PM
I agree. There is nothing special about FF anymore. I use Opera and the second choice is IE 7. I have seen enough times when people start calling names (like moron) when they can't face fact.
gtirebiter
,New York, on Nov 24, 2006 09:32 PM
Either an idiot or he works for Microsoft (much more likely)...
Andrew
,mumbai, on Nov 30, 2006 02:18 PM
Hi Andrew i agree with you that IE was more secure than FF in 2006. not only in 2006 it is secure till the end.
Omkar
,Pune, on Nov 29, 2006 03:18 PM
Switch on to Opera it is the best
Sanjay
,Ujjain, on Nov 25, 2006 10:11 AM
Get OPERA then.....
Ken
,Eugene, on Nov 25, 2006 04:36 AM
After reading this article and hearing countless other horrer stories about ff, I am grateful that I never go caught up in the frenzy to convert to ff. IE has never failed me and never will!!!
James
,None, on Nov 25, 2006 07:49 AM
You're a fool to give in to mindless FUD. FireFox has never failed me and never will; I can ensure it won't since I have the source code at the tip of my fingers. The real victims here are the brainless people who fall for such simple phishing antics. After all, it isn't the browser's job to supply its user a brain.
Upendran
,Chennai, on Nov 24, 2006 07:27 PM
Use FF password manager for non-critical sites like forums. Critical passwords like bank account etc can be specifically excluded (Tools>Options>Security>Passwords>Exceptions). External password managers like keepass may be used for critical sites.
david
,waverly, on Nov 24, 2006 12:42 PM
PayPal's gotten hit by the same thing. Look in the URL. If it's overflowing or close to, you're on a fake site. I was sent a phony email asking me to verify my PayPal information, and it took me to a bogus site that almost fooled me at first glance. Firefox actually popped up a warning about that site, but keep your eyes open.
Soutiman
,Navi Mumbai, on Nov 24, 2006 10:56 AM
Well said Dale
Dale
,Bowling Green, on Nov 24, 2006 12:18 AM
I don't know about everyone else, but I get pretty tired of these supposed security flaws cropping up all over the news. Sure, if you visit malicious websites, bad things happen. If you were to drive your car off a cliff, bad things would happen, yet we don't consider this a problem with the car. What we're having to do here is baby the clueless to avoid being labeled as "vulnerable to exploit". If people had to get a licence before "driving" a web browser, there'd be fewer "accidents" on the information highway.
Nick
,Portland, on Nov 24, 2006 01:12 AM
Amen, brother! Well said.
henry
,montreal, on Nov 24, 2006 06:36 AM
The best comment I have read so far. I wish a lot of people to have this kind of common sense.
Dav
,PALO ALTO, on Nov 24, 2006 05:54 AM
It is true and absolutely correct.
Aaron
,Auckland, on Nov 24, 2006 05:19 AM
Of course you realise that this is a bit bogus as FF vulnerabilities are more transparent as coders have access to source code and can find problems easier. FF are also generally more technical. There will be lots of as yet unfound vulnerability in IE. FF's will also be fixed faster Although good job to MS for getting there, now if they could just fix the css and other formating bugs.
Matthew Archer
,Oxnard, CA, on Nov 24, 2006 02:17 AM
This is ridiculous! Why do people want to do this to us?!?! HEY PPL... M.Y.O.F.B!
Gloria
,Denver, on Nov 24, 2006 02:16 AM
I never autofill, never allow the site remember my pw. Thats why they have paper/ pen. So jot down the pws there and don't let firefox store or any website anything. I wonder about bank bill pay sites. My bank has got some good inscription and they ask me periodically to verify other than pws.
shaharyar rao
,islamabad, on Nov 23, 2006 06:15 PM
for firefoxdo this Edit>Preferences>> Tab> security "uncheck "remember passwords for the sites" "what the bid dea?" i dont know what to do with IE
Ajith
,Dehradun, on Nov 23, 2006 07:35 PM
NoScript is a must have extension for all Firefox users. This will prevent unwanted JS code execution.

Opinion Poll