The article you linked is over 3 years old at this point. You can’t use that as the basis for your argument for software that’s likely had hundreds of patches since the time that article was published.
I agree with you, but you also can’t just assume that everything is fixed or that the security is as good as the competition these days just because the software received a lot of updates.
Look, I could point you to the blogs and patch notes for Chromium and Firefox and you could read into it and make your own conclusions from it.
From my perspective as a solution architect that has worked for several mid to large size organizations, is that security is difficult to measure and constantly changing. When I evaluate what software to use I do it on the basis of how they’ve historically addressed security concerns, and where the organization that develops the software priorities lies. My opinion is that when it comes to security, Mozilla and Google are about the same when it comes to Firefox and Chromium.
I haven’t looked into Brave much, so I can’t comment there besides it’s another organization that you have to trust so it’s inherently more risky.
I agree it depends about your security threat model. The browser, being open source is subject of several audits in the past, I don’t think if an organization just because being alphabet or Mozilla is inherently more safe, as it would have a lot of malware in chrome and firefox extensions for example, poor extension control from them…
Firefox is objectively more insecure than any chromium based browser.
https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/firefox-chromium.html
The article you linked is over 3 years old at this point. You can’t use that as the basis for your argument for software that’s likely had hundreds of patches since the time that article was published.
I agree with you, but you also can’t just assume that everything is fixed or that the security is as good as the competition these days just because the software received a lot of updates.
So, can you tell how much the situation turned up into? Seriously, I want to know. This time it is not sarcasm.
Look, I could point you to the blogs and patch notes for Chromium and Firefox and you could read into it and make your own conclusions from it.
From my perspective as a solution architect that has worked for several mid to large size organizations, is that security is difficult to measure and constantly changing. When I evaluate what software to use I do it on the basis of how they’ve historically addressed security concerns, and where the organization that develops the software priorities lies. My opinion is that when it comes to security, Mozilla and Google are about the same when it comes to Firefox and Chromium.
I haven’t looked into Brave much, so I can’t comment there besides it’s another organization that you have to trust so it’s inherently more risky.
I agree it depends about your security threat model. The browser, being open source is subject of several audits in the past, I don’t think if an organization just because being alphabet or Mozilla is inherently more safe, as it would have a lot of malware in chrome and firefox extensions for example, poor extension control from them…
You’re all over this thread desperately defending a browser.
What is your incentive here, I assume nothing and you’re cheerleading for free.
Cringey as shit.