New Firefox 3.0 alpha blocks malware, secures plug-in update

With the release Firefox 3.0 alpha 8, the Mozilla Corporation has finally unveiled several security features it's talked up for months. Among the security provisions debuting in the new alpha of "Gran Paradiso," the code name for Firefox 3.0, are built-in anti-malware warnings and protection against rogue extension updates. The malware blocker, which was first mocked up in June, will block Web sites thought to contain malicious downloads. The feature will use information provided by Google Incorporated to flag potentially-dangerous sites, warn anyone trying to reach those URLs with Firefox and automatically block access to the site.

Another new feature prevents automatic updates of extensions from sending users to malicious sites where they might be infected by attack code or drive-by downloads. Most extensions are hosted on Mozilla's own servers but the company wants to lock down the ones that are not. Mozilla will require both the actual update package and the much smaller "manifest," or notification of an update, to be delivered over an SSL-secured connection. Alternatively, the update can be digitally signed. Mozilla noted that the change doesn't affect the initial installation of an extension.

Mozilla has not officially committed to a release date for the final version of Firefox 3.0.

News source: ComputerWorld

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Hacker Finds Serious Flaw in Adobe PDF

Next Story

WLMessenger network rejects .Mac e-mail addresses

24 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Yeah well, Safari for Windows is still
in beta so there's going to be problems
with it. They haven't worked all the
bugs out yet.

We'll get Firefox converted into a bloated piece of software (POS) yet!! Doesn't Spybot S&D (sdhelper) work with Firefox?

cork1958 said,
We'll get Firefox converted into a bloated piece of software (POS) yet!! Doesn't Spybot S&D (sdhelper) work with Firefox?

So you're slating one program for getting bigger because instead you can have two programs to achieve the same thing?
Circular logic if I ever saw it.

I'm still waiting for a build of Firefox for OS X that doesn't feel like an afterthought. Firefox hardly ever locks up and crashes under windows but does so often in OS X.

Meh, if I were you, I'd probably just stick with Safari as I wouldn't expect there to be many other browsers to be specifically designed for OSX considering it's market share. :S

Dakkaroth said,
Meh, if I were you, I'd probably just stick with Safari as I wouldn't expect there to be many other browsers to be specifically designed for OSX considering it's market share. :S

Camino?

Cidinho said,
Safari is also a good browser and yet it crashes a lot on Windows, something I don't believe to be truth in a Mac...
Going by what I've heard the same can be said for iTunes. Haven't used either really since I haven't needed too. May install Safari someday to test my websites maybe but.

That's probably not going to become mainstream untill after Firefox 3.0 hits the RTM mark. There is a branch of Firefox 1.6 that's got native x64 builds, but I don't know how stable they are.

Co_Co said,
what about firefox running with low-privileges in a sandbox like IE7 on vista.

I don't ever see MS handing any corporation the keys to it's own tech, not ever, not even with licensing terms attached.