Symantec is the LAST company to even open thier mouth about non-functional software.
Last I checked, they are now the lowest ranking software in functionality and effectivness, and are souly surviving off thier once trusted name. As a Network Engineer and pc technician I actually hold thier "security" suite as more damaging than most spyware and usually uninstall it on sight and install AVG or Avast.

New Syamntec company acronym: PCKB (Pot calling the kettle black)

Maybe Symantec should make their own browser since they think they can do better.

Although I agree with Symantec on the browser issue, I have to say that there is no good reason to have any symantec products clogging up your computer.

if Symantec made toilet paper , and i had to choose between sandpaper and symantec brand TP i know what I'd take

Dumped ff for opera, and adware is completely useless since then so is nod 32 and they just are down there wasting resources.
I don't care why opera is safer but nobody is going to disagree that your PC is safer when you are using opera in comparison with IE or ff.
opera have smallest number of vulnerabilities and that is enough. So what user base is small and i know that is the reason why it is safer than most and that is all i caer about.

Symantec needs to "stuff a cork in it" lately. When Symantec offers up a browser to compete THEN that can speak up on this topic. Until then they need to shut up and get back to feeding their dying business model. Anyone serious about virus SW gave up on them years ago.

P.S. Hey Symantec, memory resident system tray apps SUCK, stop making them.

Interesting, but i must say, there is a such thing as a secure browser. Firefox w/ ad block plus, noscript and filterG set.
And guess what, the safest browsing you can get.

Then there is IE, no add ons, nothing, just insecure pile of crap.

And then there is symantec, who had a back door in there software, has been targeted by virus and malware, and i guess there next statement will be .. "there is no safe A/v"

Symantec has and always will be the WORST software on the market for AV and Security.

Firefox with all the doo-dads you want to install on it still isn't going to be 100% secure.

Symantec is definately just playing on people's fears to try and sell more of their shoddy software though.

I've been saying this for years! There has never been, or will ever be, any "safe" software. You need to know and select software (even A/V) that would do the least damage.

What do you expect Symantec to say?

"Symantec says 'You don't need our products any longer' " ... yeah right.

They took a lesson straight out of the Bush administration's play book: scare the crap out of people to make yourself look legitimate.

Anything Symantec says at this point is synonymous with a smoking pile of crap.

I think that regardles of what Symantec says, the number of identified vulnerabilities on all browsers speak for themselves. Nothing is safe. What Symantec states seems to be accurate.

Does anybody actually believe what symantec says about security?

They would never say "everybody should use this browser because then they don't need to install our product". Yeah, OK. Sure.

Thats like the army saying "we have complete peace throughout the world. Please disband us immediately".

I think that there is no "safe" anti-virus program either.

Symantec's AV software has caused me far more security issues than Opera has.

You need to look at the larger picture, not just at the picture being painted by a company that is trying to project the image of being a security watchdog.

Symantec is right. I've long been telling people it's merely a matter of picking one's poison. The article also implicitly confirms that the problem is typically at the keyboard and not inherent to the computer or browser.

That said, Sophist_Dreams is right about Avast!. Combine it with Spyware Doctor and even only the XP firewall and you can easily kiss Symantec goodbye. (But whatever you do, avoid Microsoft's Windows Live One Care like the plague! After six weeks of testing, it proved to be a complete joke by catching almost nothing thrown at it.)

And on another note, who here within only the past few weeks said spyware is not a problem anymore? Still feel that way with real data looking at you? Yes, spyware is still a huge problem.

STFU Symantec

Stop trying to scare people into buying your BLOATWARE... Eat a dik too

I love it, Symantic post a BS article to scare people into buying their BS products and what gets posted here is arguments about which browser is "Best". Use whatever browser works best for you, Symantic couldn't give a big rats butt as long as someone reads the article and sends them money. Save yourselves some money, download Avast! or one of the other good FREE anti virus programs.

Good for them. Bad for you.

This article clearly reflects the on going, so called "Browser technology war".This dilemma is the obvious consequence of,the struggle to provide the ultimate browsing experince to the ever increasing internet users.Although these browsers claim to have an edge over one another,each one of these seem to be incompetent in providing a robust & secure environment.

The probable solution is,not to keep piling up extra features; but to re-organize the very approach of accessing the internet!!

I use Mozilla in last 5 years and I didn't get any viruses. Only noobs need an antivirus.

You are right. Only "noobs" get "viruses"

Jaded "pro" types like yourself who use no protection get Trojans, instead.

Enjoy.

I once felt that way. I'm glad I changed my mind about two years ago. Since then, Avast! has been triggered once by a virus and twice by a Trojan. Both came from apparently "legitimate" sources where one would not expect something to be lurking. (Have you read about the infection problems with some very legitimate corporate web sites? In fact, wasn't there an article here at BetaNews about that only within the past couple of weeks?)

(BTW, the virus was identified by Avast! while using Mozilla Firefox. Agreeing with the article, I have no idea why someone thinks *any* particular browser makes them safe.)

Symantec is correct. What they forgot to mention is the fact that it is most true if you use Norton products to protect your system. I don't know anyone who would even think of using Symantec products.

My company supports Linux for the home user. What virus infects that operating system with which browser ?

Forget Internet Explorer or Windows. Use Linux and surf the net in freedom again.

You also get to spend a few weeks searching for drivers and downgrading the quality of audio and video on your system. Some linux systems also have problems with raid arrays, they simply don't see your hard drives. If you don't use command line in Windows, and most people don't, you can forget about linux.

IE is 11 years old, and they are still finding loads of flaws per month. Anyone who thinks IE is the safest browser is either blind or an idiot.

IE forever :)
I will never use any other crap ;)

Of late I have been noticing that Google is trying to introduce a lot of new tools, and these are seriously interfering with the normal working of the browser. Some of these tools appear not to have been properly tested. Initially I was tempted to install and use some of these tools, including the customizable search page, but now I am seeing I was better off without them.

Mr Bill Gates must introduce a display window showing what the heck the system is up to when it hangs up, or is taking an unusually long time over a process. This way the user can disable the program or process. At least I would feel much more comfortable with this arrangement, knowing that it could be almost a fortnight before Mr Gates' army gets around to fixing it.

A. Mukherjee

I'm sure Mr Bill Gates is working on your little problem at the moment... you should be hearing from him soon. In the mean time try "Ctrl, Alt, Del" Task Manager, Process and sort by CPU usage... right click and kill.

Safe software would be the worst of all news for Symantec.

Props to 33Nick for summing up this non-news in one tasty bite-sized post.

"there is no "safe" browser."

WOW ... how long did it take them to work out you can say that ? And on the back of findings that "attackers were no longer primarly focusing on Internet Explorer". They should patent this scare tactic and licience it to other scaremongers ... "There are no safe cars..." said the bus operators. "There are no safe buses" said the train operators. There are no safe trains said the airlines ... etc

Its a load of old waffle to basicaly sell more products and let us all know in a roundabout way that the internet is a big bad world and before you click and reach for your credit card to put brain into gear or else you get royaly shafted.

Give it up with the FUD, Symantec, your day was yesterday.

"Whereas Firefox flaws are patched in an average of one day after public disclosure, it takes Microsoft nine days. Opera was second fastest at two days, and Apple third at five days."

Wow, I had no idea about these numbers!

Those numbers do look nice. But how long do they know about them before they disclose it to the public?

Firefox has been safe for me, at least for the past 4 months I have been using it. Maybe Firefox is safer than Internet Explorer because of the small minority that is using it at the present time and it does not have the hacker's attention at the momemnt or whether is safer because of its open-source roots....nonetheless, it is working for me and I am going to continue to use it.

"among phishing and spam risks, the company said it had detected 157,477 unique phishing messages, a staggering 81 percent increase over last period."

Like I always say... Why should they waste time making code for an exploit when all they have to do is ask the moron in front of the computer.

well according to symantec there is probably no safe car... none of them can prevent the driver from driving himself or herself off a cliff.

The browser has nothing to do with being safe on the internet, it's how smart the person using it is when it comes to browsing the internet by not going to suspect websites and downloading and installing things you aren't sure about.

Yes it does, but to a much lesser degree. There have been numerous IE attacks that didn't even require opening an attachment or going to a malicious site.

This is due to the symbiotic relationship between Windows, IE, and Outlook Express.

Only a complete moron (or someone that knows nothing about computers) would think there is such a thing as a 100% completely safe browser.

The idea is to have (and use) the "safer" one. But, in all reality...the only way to have the safest browser is just simply to never update.

to the text based browsers we shall flock. :)

Or IE5. Oh wait, your logic doesn't work on that one...

Are you suggesting that IE5 was worse?

"Transmission coming in sir. It's from Captain Obvious!"
"What's it say?"
"Uh... 'There is no safe browser'"

Theres a simple way to make any browser totally safe... disconnect your internet.

The more I see of the problems with IE, Firefox and Opera the more I am glad to have Netscape its seems to be problem free
as regular sweeps with antivirus programs show no attacks

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Netscape based off Firefox?

Yes, Netscape is just a rebadged Firefox with a different theme.

Actually I think the new Netscape uses both Firefox and IE elements... so in theory it's got the flaws of both systems. :P

I know for sure Netscape doesn't supply the patches to Firefox code as quickly as Firefox itself.

Netscape can actually switch between the IE and Firefox rendering engines. The same functionality can be obtained on Firefox by installing the IEtab extension.

edit: and betanews just put my post in the wrong place.

someone still uses netscape?

You're wrong...

Firefox is based off Netscape.

I'm showing my age now aren't I?

Yeah like I can believe anything they say when they cannot even make their bloated software work correctly. Duh talk to the hand............

Yeah, and your software blows, So whats the point.

Good job I use Opera then. 1 Secunia issue in 3 months. Can't get too much safer than that.

Indeed, and the 1 issue was fixed in 2 days..

Whilst no browser is 100% secure, you can help yourself by choosing a browers that is designed from the ground up with security in mind. The only browser currently that fits this bill is Opera.

They should test IE 7 Release Candidate 7. Its security features can kick Mozilla's any day. Also, one of the reasons IE has so many vulnerbilities is because hackers want to affect as many people as possible so must work on trojans that work with the majority of web browsers (Internet Explorer). Although I do agree Microsoft should act quicker on patching fulnerbilities, Internet Explorer 7 (even though in RC stage) is still the better choice.

You can't patch "stupidity".....

You can't fix stupid. heh

Found: 93 Secunia Security Advisories:
http://secunia.com/searc...mantec&sort_by=date

Seriously, it's pathetic that IE is at this level of vulnerability. Yes, it's a given that people will attempt to exploit the most popular browser the most, but the resources behind Microsoft versus Mozilla?

"Firefox flaws are patched in an average of one day after public disclosure." That makes me feel better than being told that there's no safe browser, which is obvious anyway.

Um... if you are going to compare resources, then also compare the amount of products as well on both sides. Microsoft has more resources because they have more retail products.

Seems like most people here haven't been involved with IE7.... mmmmm.

"This browser is flawless -- you don't need our product anymore".

Good points below.

A- Symantec is in the business of selling security and might we add, buggy software that cannot be uninstalled easily.

B- How many exploits were patched correctly, in a timely manner with Firefox compared to I.E.?

C- This is coming on the heels of more reports on how anti virus softwares makers are losing ground not being able to keep up with the slew of exploits.

Tough market to be in. Good PR stunt disguised in a study.

I'd rather have spyware and trojans on my system than that Symantec crap. Fortunately I don't have to have either.

Well if you're a ****ing pansy a** idiot who clicks on everything then what can you expect.....

Symantec is also in the business of SELLING software that can "protect" you. It's not baseless FUD, but it's FUD disguised as a marketing plan.

"Symantec Says There's No Safe Browser"

Oh look the shmucks finally grew a brain.

I can't disagree with that.

"While Internet Explorer remains the most frequently targeted browser, accounting for 47 percent of all attacks, in the first six months of this year more vulnerabilities have appeared in Mozilla Firefox than within IE. 47 flaws were discovered in Firefox, compared with 38 for IE."

As I've said when the numbers were opposite from this--the number of flaws is not the big deal, only the number of unpatched exploits.

Re: the number of flaws is not the big deal, only the number of unpatched exploits.

Amen brother.

Let's see how the numbers change when you divide both by the total flaws discovered per browser. This gives you the percentage of browser flaws discovered this month... higher numbers mean more flaws have went UNPATCHED until now. This way you get numbers that actually mean something, although you still have to take time into effect (remember IE6 has been out YEARS longer than Firefox, and thus, ideally, should have had more than enough time to work out any major code problems. Yet we see 38 more have popped up since March).

I work with tech support, and 50% of my calls have to do with some type of virus or spy ware. People are still ignorant on internet security. It is necessary that those young kids who are aware of these things teach the older crowd what not to click on and what not to do online. Symantec on the other hand is in the business of security and they will do anything to stay in business. They are probably exploiting these flaws and who knows may be even creating some of these Trojans. All you have to do is reverse engineer some of these browsers and you will find many flaws you can exploit.

"I work with tech support, and 50% of my calls have to do with some type of virus or spy ware."

Amen, man! Sadley, "hardware support" basically means there's a bunch of pi$$ed off callers that don't assist customers in removing those 433 spywares and 312 trojans. Format and reinstall? Yeah, we do that :)