Com-Central.net

Shadow_Bshwackr

Man, IE just can't seem to stay out of the limelight and here's another problem with it. Fortunatly, there's a test to see if you're vulnerable and options to fix it. Below is a quote from PC Magazine's Security Watch.

Security Watch: New Phishing Hook Found in Internet Explorer

A bug in Internet Explorer has been publicly disclosed that allows a phishing site to display a different URL in the address bar than that of the actual site displayed. The bug affects fully-patched Internet Explorer 6.0 systems.

According to Secunia the vulnerability is due to a flaw in the handling of Macromedia Flash .swf files in IE windows.

To do the test at Secunia: Click HERE!

Doug_Kibbey

I have seen similar behavior on a couple of sites I visited in actual practice...in those cases, a full "Google" window was displayed (without having asked for one) and it seemed clearly internal to a site to which I was re-directed. Sort of the "photographic negative" of the symptom described. It seemed calculated to convince you that you were at Google, when in fact, you weren't (a good way to harvest data about your searches, apart from anything else). Does this sound related?

When I get suspicous re-directs, I use task manager to end it (instead of clicking in IE to leave) and start over. I don't know if this is helpful, but it makes me feel better.....

Shades

Amazing.
The longer this goes on, and the more frequently it occurs, the more shaky becomes the grip of M$.
Wonder when they'll start testing properly before releases.

One of the criteria for the time available to test an application is calculated by the risk it would pose to the company to release it early. Every software test environment recognises that and it's a fact of life. Does seem that M$ repeatedly set the bar a bit too low for their own good though. Takes longer to shake a bad reputation than a good one. Costs more though.

Shades

After I made this post, I thought of something.

I did the test in IE (I have 6.02) and found I was vulnerable.

Then I re-took it using Maxthon.
Maxthon is a little used and little known browser (it's like a cross between IE and Firefox - great for those of us who don't like the fox).
It's fast and efficient but was built on the Explorer engine.
I was intrigued as to whether it would similarly be vulnerable because of it's origins.

Well whaddaya know?
Even though it's built on the IE engine, it's NOT vulnerable using this test.

Shadow_Bshwackr

Or you can get FireFox...ROFLMAO... (Snickering)...

Shades

NEVAaaaaaaaaaaa!

Never got the damn thing to display properly fer one thing.
IE has it's faults but at least you don't have to faff about with positioning.
When it displays me pages properly without me havin to do anythin', I'll think about it.

[Historically speaking, skwirrells n foxes don't mix!]

Razz

Doug_Kibbey

The proposed bandaid is to "disable active script support"...how do you do that (exactly!) and what is the implication for other apps?

JG300-EXOS · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 15, 2005 Posts: 495

FIREFOX rules!!! And I have no display problems here...

Shades

- Doug_Kibbey

The proposed bandaid is to "disable active script support"...how do you do that (exactly!) and what is the implication for other apps?

Means that, on some interactive controls (buttons, etc), you have to make a choice to actively click them to make them active so you can click them (if you see what I mean).
Mr. Green

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Archive Revive
Username:
This is an archived topic - your reply will not be appended here. Instead, a new topic will be generated in the active forum. The new topic will provide a reference link to this archived topic.

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big