Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Wednesday December 16 2015, @08:41PM   Printer-friendly
from the the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same dept.

While both Betteridge's Law and common sense say, "No," Zack Whittaker at ZDNet takes a closer look:

An analysis of the last five-months' worth of monthly software updates shows that Edge had 25 vulnerabilities shared with versions of Internet Explorer, which had a total of 100 vulnerabilities.

Earlier this month on its scheduled Patch Tuesday update offering, Microsoft released MS15-124, a cumulative update for Internet Explorer, and MS15-125, a near-identical patch for Edge. Of the 15 flaws patched in Internet Explorer, 11 of those were also patched in Edge.

According to a Microsoft blog post earlier this year, the software giant's newest browser, an exclusive for Windows 10, is said to have been designed to "defend users from increasingly sophisticated and prevalent attacks."

In doing that, Edge scrapped older, insecure, or flawed plugins or frameworks, like ActiveX or Browser Helper Objects. That already helped to cut a number of possible drive-by attacks traditionally used by attackers. EdgeHTML, which powers Edge's rendering engine, is a fork of Trident, which still powers Internet Explorer.

[...] Older versions of Internet Explorer will be retired by mid-January, giving millions of users about a month to upgrade to Internet Explorer 11, or to Edge on Windows 10.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 17 2015, @01:30AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday December 17 2015, @01:30AM (#277430) Journal

    Actually - you WILL use the fonts that I've installed on my system. I really don't give the smallest damn how the author of the page intended the fonts to be rendered. I've blocked all the internet fonts, because I'm on a very slow DSL, and it just pisses me off that my bandwidth is wasted downloading a different font for every page load. It wouldn't be so bad, but the fonts aren't cached (that I can tell) so they aren't reused. Each and every page load requires a font to be downloaded.

    And, why? Pages render quite well without the constant downloading.

    That's a large part of the reason that advertising sites are blocked at the router - without ads, my page loads in 15 - 30 seconds. With all the ads, it might take two minutes to load the same page. And, the ads are served up first, of course - I can't read the content while the ads load in the backgroud.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 17 2015, @02:38AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 17 2015, @02:38AM (#277454)

    That can "DSL"

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 17 2015, @05:18PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 17 2015, @05:18PM (#277771)

    What I meant is that the fonts would be hard-wired into the hypothetical "vector browser". There would be no down-loading fonts once the browser is installed. True, there may be a DOM-based emulator as an option, but heavy users of the vector browser would probably want to download it.

    And, I don't want to outright prevent custom fonts, but doing so may risk cross-platform compatibility. The vector browser would mostly target work-oriented "serious" applications and not brochure-ware applications. (The existing browsers can have that market.) Thus, if you want something low-maintenance and want WYSIWYG testing, you use the built-in fonts.