And how would the browser access that code in a pdf on your computer? (Answer: it can't.)
And how would the browser access that code in a pdf on your computer? (Answer: it can't.)
There's kind of a difference between unauthorized changes to files and unauthorized network connections / host intrusions. BTW, FreeBSD has security/snort and Wireshark for packet sniffing, if you like. It's usually kind of a pain to remember to turn the antivirus off every time you need to upgrade/patch something. This is why most companies just have a few dedicated appliances set up as firewalls. You gotta have appropriate tools for the job.
Totally agree. The JS bug was probably written for a windows client.
Firewall is not the same as patching, antivirus, file signatures and the like. Firewalls are one piece of the puzzle. People who stand up a firewall and consider the job done are always surprised when when their site is compromised. (Just like people who think a VPN will protect them.)
I do agree that security is a layered approach. But there are appropriate tools for every layer. You can't exactly tell snort to act like pf. This is partly why I'm not wild about solutions that claim to be all-in-one, like Aide or Tripwire. They tend to focus on just one layer, and other layers suffer as a result.
Absolutely. On top of that I use xpdf which does not have modern virus prone features.
Well, Kaspersky is a particularly interesting case of virus work. It is well known that Kaspersky and InfoWatch are deeply tied to the Russian espionage service (the FSB), and to Russian black-hat culture (some of which work for the Russian government, some for criminal organizations). Kaspersky is also a white-hat business that sells legitimate virus scanning software, and it has gone to some effort to legitimize itself. This double-duty setup is very much like a bad mafia movie, where the mafioso guarantees your security, but also takes protection money for that.
I did not know this!
You you have citable sources or is it chitchat?
Yeah! I did not know either. But I still do not know it.
Malware BrowserGuard would be replaced by ublock Origin, noScript, deCentralyse extensions here. Any reason to use it in addition or as a replacement? I know Malware coy is an antivirus coy though.
Also Trocker, CSS Exfil Protection and minerBlock. Bonus for Privacy Badger.
Start at the Wikipedia page. In particular the ones for Mr. and Mrs. Kaspersky (they are the CEOs of the Kaspersky anti-virus company and of InfoWatch, an anti-leak company, respectively).
Be assured that I do at least low hanging research before pressing the "Post reply" button. My conclusions from reading Wikipedia was and still is, that what you said cannot be confirmed by reliable sources. As long as you cannot provide appropriate cites from credible sources you make assumptions.
Are you sure? I really don't think FreeBSD is that invincible.
Of course. If for no other reason than it allows you to pass it on to others.
I freely admit that I do not have citable sources for my opinion that both these businesses are tied to the Russian state intelligence operations. There is lots of circumstantial evidence on the web; search for "FSB Kasperskaya" or InfoWatch or Kaspersky (Kasperskaya is the last name of Mrs. Kaspersky in the Russian way of writing it, she's the CEO of InfoWatch, and co-founder and ex-wife of Kaspersky anti-virus). This includes legal documents and articles in respectable newspapers. Hard facts that are published tend to not exist when government intelligence is concerned.
I was sure that the Malware Browser Guard would focus on malware while uBO is meant to block scripts, XS scripts, etc almost similar to noScript. I was not so sure *ware was necessary on *BSD as most people have been saying here.
It is.
None of that is needed. Complete waste. The provided lists are all you need. Keep it updated.
Thank you for your honerable clarification.
Have you seen this paper? Do you remember when it was issued (month/year)? And which agency issued it?
