Paypal to block 'unsafe browsers'

Web payment firm Paypal has said it will block "unsafe browsers" from using its service as part of wider anti-phishing efforts.

Customers will first be warned that a browser is unsafe but could then be blocked if they continue using it. Paypal said it was "an alarming fact that there is a significant set of users who use very old and vulnerable browsers such as Internet Explorer 4". Phishing attacks trick users into handing over sensitive data.

Paypal said some users were still using Internet Explorer 3 , released more than 10 years ago. It lacks many of the security and safety features needed to protect users from phishing and other online attacks. Paypal said it supported the use of Extended Validation SSL Certificates. Browsers which support the technology highlight the address bar in green when users are on a site that has been deemed legitimate.

The latest versions of Internet Explorer and Firefox support EV SSL certificates, but Apple's Safari browser for Mac and PCs does not.

View: BBC News

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft's Vista promo video just a "spoof"

Next Story

MySQL reserves features for paying customers

15 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

(.fahim said @ #7.1)
Why IE6?

Read all the changes in security added by IE7 and you will know.

I would block these browsers :

IE6 and below
Firefox 1.0 and below
Opera 8 and below

So the brand new Safari 3 and the 10-year old IE can't handle the security requirements?

Very interesting.

well I ran IE6 on an old machine years ago with 32meg of ram if memory serves me correctly which would be a decent step up over IE3. And no, it worked fine with that 32 so I fail to see how 256 would be a huge issue as long as you browse with the lack of memory in mind.

(Magallanes said @ #2.1)
Having fun installing and using a new browser on a pc with 256mb ram.

ram is practically free nowadays.... it would be dirt cheap to add (a total of) 512MB to a older PC pretty much.... which would do wonders for it and would be able to run windows xp well on 512MB.

cause i figure PC's with less than 512MB of ram are really obsolete and a upgrade is pretty much mandatory lol ... although 256MB of ram would not be all that bad if someone was running something like Windows98 as a browser like Firefox3 dont use to much ram and you should see atleast decent performance in a case like that.

(ThaCrip said @ #2.2)

ram is practically free nowadays.... it would be dirt cheap to add (a total of) 512MB to a older PC pretty much.... which would do wonders for it and would be able to run windows xp well on 512MB.

You look into that little boys eyes who hasn't had food for a week and tell him that people practically throw food away in the USA.

(Magallanes said @ #2.1)
Having fun installing and using a new browser on a pc with 256mb ram.

Most of my customers are running computers that are 3 - 4 years old that have 256 megs of ram. I offer to upgrade their ram when I can, but most are happy.

(m-p{3} said @ #1)
Meh, User Agent Switcher.

Wait ... so people using unsafe browsers are going to use User Agent Switches rather than upgrade ... because they don't want more security?

(Kirkburn said @ #1.1)

Wait ... so people using unsafe browsers are going to use User Agent Switches rather than upgrade ... because they don't want more security?

One would assume that if the browser can't connect with whatever security certificate they use, then the user agent string won't make a difference.