What Difference Does it Make if I Use Chrome vs. Firefox?

Free Mozilla Firefox Open Source Web Browser

What difference does it make if I use Chrome vs. Firefox?

Transparency:

Transparency, as used in science, engineering, business, the humanities and in a social context more generally, implies openness, communication, and accountability. Transparency is operating in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed. It has been defined simply as "the perceived quality of intentionally shared information from a sender". For example, a cashier making change after a point of sale transaction by offering a record of the items purchased (e.g., a receipt) as well as counting out the customer's change on the counter demonstrates transparency.

Google chose to make Chrome, as distinguished from its open source counterpart Chromium, proprietary, non-open source.  Their decision to exclude public access to the software's code was intentional and designed to place the end-user at a 'disadvantage'.

Should the public have a right to participate in oversight of software's source code that runs on their personal computers?  The answer is an emphatic yes.

If an end-user chooses proprietary solutions, they leave themselves open to exploitation in some fashion.  The licensing terms restrict, the true functionality of the software cannot be vetted as being devoid of 'rogue code' or having hidden unmaintained software defects which, if unpatched, could leave said software in a vulnerable state.


Global Crime Rings find defects and then sell exploit kits on the black market for as yet unpatched 'Zero Day Exploits'.  The likelihood that an unpatched software defect will remain unnoticed increases when using proprietary software.


Most often Linux open source is updated with a downloadable patch within a matter of hours of discovery.  If on the other hand the end-user is running Microsoft Windows Legacy, a patch may never come if the vulnerability remains hidden, unnoticed by Microsoft programming staff, or, at best will be corrected on 'Patch Tuesday', once a month by Microsoft.


The point I hope readers get from this post is this:  

With open source code maintenance, it is difficult at best for an exploitable software 'bug' to go unnoticed for an extended period of time, and it is near-impossible to merge 'rogue code' into a developer team's git repo tree which gets reviewed by many peers around the globe.

The World can and will thrive if we all share, each and every one of us.  It is our human nature to do so.  Without sharing, we will continue to see great exploitation by proprietary business and government which results in human inequality and suffering.

Make a statement which is powerful.  Demand openness.

Insist on and be selective by using only open source software.

Open Source and free Firefox can be downloaded here.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• What is Open-Source Software and How Has it Grown?

Read More

Linux Turla Malware Infection? Not Going to Happen.

cdoor.c - packet coded backdoor (credit: phenolit.de)

C'mon.  Here is yet another sensational report 'wishing' that Linux is infection prone.  It isn't okay?

The SecureList authors imply that there is a Linux version of a known Windows malware, called Turla.  Conveniently, they call it a variant.

Where is the documentation for a Linux 'vector of infection'?  Oops, somehow, they forgot to include it.

Including the source code doesn't count as documentation for vector of infection.  It merely documents the program's purpose, not how it lands on a Linux PC.

On the other hand, one can visit Kaspersky to see it is well-documented for Windows.

This code simply isn't in any Linux repository.

That means one must intentionally deviate and go outside of the keyring-protected repo of applications 'into the wild' to obtain this rogue software.

By definition, a trojan, requires one to install the application and then explicitly run it to have its 'payload' execute.

In the conclusion of the SecureList story, the authors wrote:

"Although Linux variants from the Turla framework were known to exist, we haven't seen any in the wild yet."

Paleeze.  This sensational reporting has got to stop.

Known to exist?  Based on what exactly?  Again, no details.

Folks, Fedora Linux is the safest operating system on the Planet.

I stake my reputation on it.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• User:Levex

Read More

Lions, Tigers, Bears, and FBI Warnings, Oh My!

Wizard of Oz Movie (Image credit: prairiecloudware.com)

Seriously, do you tire of seeing major news plastered with warnings about cyber attacks, malware and viruses?

It really has grown to a fever pitch lately.

What stuck in my craw today was a Bloomberg report Exclusive: FBI warns of 'destructive' malware attack in the wake of the SONY attack.

Like, I should be mortified maybe?  Do these 'brainiacs' remember StuxNet?

Would it help to revisit the topic?  I'd rather not, thank you very much.  Please feel free to read the Wikipedia link on the subject.

It was the perfect road-side billboard if there ever was for why Microsoft Legacy (x86) Windows should be abandoned on grounds of National Security.

Sadly, the software industry hasn't changed and quite frankly isn't going to as long as 'big business' is married to a security-flawed 'by design' operating system.

What do I mean by 'by design'?  Microsoft provides undocumented APIs through their Trusted Platform to domestic and foreign governmental agencies (the FBI included) to have unfettered access to any Windows PC without the user's expressed permission.  (Insert sound of crickets here.)

That seems to me to be a major violation of public privacy.  And that's what the public get using proprietary software.  Transparency is non-existent.

Could writing code that facilitates having 'back doors' on to computers exist in the Open Source World?  I should think not!

Well, so far, we haven't seen any.

Of course there have been recent documented attempts by the NSA to weaken string constants in Elliptic Curve Cryptography used by Secure Sockets Layer, but it is a different kettle of fish to write a bank of code, spanning perhaps thousands of lines, dedicated to the specific purpose of providing 'backdoors' without going noticed under the Gnu General Public License for Open Source.  That kind of exploitative code cannot exist in FOSS projects.  Transparency is in full force with 'many eyes' providing the much-needed oversight.  As it should be.

Edward Snowden is correct:

“Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of the few things that you can rely on." 

Unlike Open Source, the Proprietary Software Anti-Virus Business gets a boost every time one of these 'sensational' stories comes out.  It's a stimulus to obtain a desired result: the masses run out to buy AV Tools which get immediately installed.  End users fire up their AV tools, then passively watch a pretty widget on screen scanning, despite for foregoing 'backdoor' api.  The asthetic is dispensed  as the user receives a 'false sense of security'.   AV software vendors make billions of dollars in sales annually.  The partnership between Microsoft and AV Vendors is entrenched and the myth lives on.

None of this would have been mentioned if I didn't know better -- it insults my intelligence.

I know full well that if every Windows PC were to switch to Fedora Linux, all of the security issues would be gone.  Zero.  None.

So, please.  Spare me the FUD.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• 5 Sony Pictures films leak online after massive hack

Read More