Built-in browser expiry proposed to fight botnet menace
45% fail to update surfing software, report finds
Regcast training : Hyper-V 3.0, VM high availability and disaster recovery
Nearly half (45.2 per cent) of all internet surfers neglect to regularly update their browser software. Slackness in applying updates in a timely fashion leaves an estimated 637 million surfers vulnerable to drive-by download attacks, according to a new survey.
Figures in the survey come from a study of user-agent data collected by Google’s web search and application servers and analyzed by security researchers from IBM's ISS security division, Google and ETH Zurich University.
The study found that Firefox users were the most diligent in applying security updates, with 83.3 per cent using the latest version. Less than half (47.6 per cent) of IE users used a fully patched version. Part of the problem with IE users could be down to compatibility with older enterprise applications, notes IBM security researcher Gunter Ollmann.
"I think it may be a little unfair for many IE users to be grouped in the “less diligent” bucket because they’re stuck to using IE5 or IE6 for compatibility issues with their corporate applications but, quite frankly, in this climate of commercial mass-defacements, 'unfair' isn’t going to keep them safe," Ollmann writes.
Unsurprisingly the study concluded that update features within different browsers played a key role in determining how quickly users update their software. Firefox users "typically updated" within three days of the availability of a new security update. Opera users averaged around 11 days before patching their browser while some IE users are still stuck on IE6 a year and a half after the release of IE7.
The security researchers reckon browser makers could improve internet security by taking a leaf from the book of food manufactures and applying a "best before" date to browser and plug-in software. The theory is that a built-in expiry date would ensure that more users update in a timely fashion. Ollmann concedes that opponents may argue that the concept would simply confuse less web-savvy users without having the desired effect.
A white paper on the study, Understanding the Web browser threat, can be found here. ®
COMMENTS
It's not FF2 vs FF3
...is it... It's FF2.X vs 2.X+1, or 3.x to 3.x+1 So quit the arguments about fanbois upgrading to the latest and greatest etc.
How about this
I'd rather a few specific major sites simply refuse to serve pages to out-of-date browsers. Try to search with Google, and instead of results it responds that your browser is out of date. Go to MSN.com and it informs you that you need to update. Of course, it won't happen unless someone provides them major incentive to refuse traffic.
Oh boy
Windows updater can be set to download but not install..
AV updater, I can still play games with settings high enough to give me great graphics and game play and the av update loads in the background, still works.
Hmm I'm still running FF2 as well, FF3 bombed out on me within 5 minutes.
other browser is IE 6, there is an IE 7 blocker that will stop you getting the update and you should be able to rollback IE 7 (just look in Add/Remove programs - windows components and wait like 5 minutes, that used to be almost instant in Win 98).
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Top 10 SIEM implementer’s checklist
Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner
Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
