If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
I have read a couple reviews and am still not clear on whether it would be a
step up from Chrome for me. -- Pete Cresswell |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
On Tue, 22 May 2018 11:31:41 -0400, "(PeteCresswell)"
wrote: I have read a couple reviews and am still not clear on whether it would be a step up from Chrome for me. I don't know it at all, but as far as I'm concerned, anything except Edge is a step up from Chrome. But why not just try it and see what you think? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
PeteCresswell wrote:
I have read a couple reviews and am still not clear on whether it would be a step up from Chrome for me. I haven't played with that one. Don't see the point. You can check but I suspect that it will install a separate instance of a Chrome variant in a different folder and with separate registry entries. Avast's secure web browser is a Chromium variant. If you don't like it then later uninstall it; however, I wouldn't rely on it being more secure without testing that claim. Other so-called secure web browsers that I've trialed have not proven more secure versus what I can do with the standard variant of the web browser. There is nothing (well, little) the so-called "secure" web browsers can do that you cannot do by configuring the web browser yourself. All they do is start (install) with a default set of options that are different than for the standard (um, non-secure) installation. You can lockdown the web browser just as well yourself. Some web browsers are far more configurable than others; for example, you can do a hell of a lot with Firefox's about:config than with Chrome's user settings & chrome:flags. https://www.tomsguide.com/us/avast-s...ews-22214.html (dated 05-Feb-2016) Because Avast's secure web browser is a variant of Chromium, and because that web browser doesn't have many user- or program-configurable options, the source code must be modified to "secure" the web browser. They probably fixed it by now but the point is that you can do the lockdown yourself, especially if you move to Firefox. There are some settings in web browsers that will aid in improving security, like having it purge ALL it local data upon its exit. Firefox has that option. Chrome does not, so you need to get an extension that performs that function. However, unless Chrome is configured to allow background web apps to continue running after its exit (a security issue since the extension is using external ancilliary software that runs outside the web browser's processes), purge-on-exit is not allowed in Chrome. However, and without using ancilliary software, some extensions will purge Chrome's local data upon starting Chrome; i.e., they can cleanup when you load Chrome. Since the local data is unused until the next session in Chrome, whether you purge-on-exit or purge-on-load makes little difference. I simply use a shortcut in a Windows taskbar toolbar to Ccleaner ("ccleaner.exe /auto") to perform the web browser cleanup after exiting Chrome, plus I have it scheduled to run in the wee morn hours. An extension just makes sure it happens on every exit or load of the web browser. The point is that you need extensions with Chrome to get it to have the same functionality as Firefox. Hell, you even have to install an extension to get newly opened tabs to have focus (instead of backgrounded), something Chrome users have been asking since Google came out with Chrome and has been available as a tab option in Firefox since, um, forever. I do use Chrome as my primary web browser and Firefox as the secondary. That is because Mozilla had such a huge moving target with all the basic changes they made in Firefox over the last year. Now that Firefox has stabilized a bit, I might go back to it. However, just go through the options and chrome:flags already available to lockdown Chrome (and Firefox although you use about:config instead of chrome:flags). There are LOTS of online articles how to lockdown both web browsers. I have doc folders with saved copies of articles for both. My suggestion: don't waste time getting a "secure" web browser. Figure out how to lockdown the one(s) you already have. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
I have read a couple reviews and am still not clear on whether it would be a step up from Chrome for me. Never heard of it but I would be wary of it based on the amount of Avast spam that the scanner version sends out on every email and ng post. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:37 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote:
Never heard of it but I would be wary of it based on the amount of Avast spam that the scanner version sends out on every email and ng post. Which can be disabled very easily. It's not 'hidden' anymore in Mail Shield; it can now be find in Settings (Enable Avast email signature). -- s|b |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
s|b wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:37 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote: Never heard of it but I would be wary of it based on the amount of Avast spam that the scanner version sends out on every email and ng post. Which can be disabled very easily. It's not 'hidden' anymore in Mail Shield; it can now be find in Settings (Enable Avast email signature). True. I hate to say it but most of my co-workers and friends would not know how or even attempt to do that. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
On Tue, 22 May 2018 22:02:38 +0200, s|b wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2018 14:41:37 -0500, Paul in Houston TX wrote: Never heard of it but I would be wary of it based on the amount of Avast spam that the scanner version sends out on every email and ng post. Which can be disabled very easily. It's not 'hidden' anymore in Mail Shield; it can now be find in Settings (Enable Avast email signature). Well yes, but in fact most Avast users don't disable it, but just go on advertising Avast to everyone they correspond with. -- Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://BrownMath.com/ http://OakRoadSystems.com/ Shikata ga nai... |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Avast Secure Browser: Do you feel comfortable using it?
s|b wrote:
Paul in Houston TX wrote: Never heard of it but I would be wary of it based on the amount of Avast spam that the scanner version sends out on every email and ng post. Which can be disabled very easily. It's not 'hidden' anymore in Mail Shield; it can now be find in Settings (Enable Avast email signature). Don't even have to disable. Don't bother installing the Mail Shield module (or uninstall it if you got suckered into installing it). They rely on users not investigating what all the offered modules will do. The Mail Shield is completely superfluous. If you are infected despite using Avast (or any AV), scanning outbound e-mails won't work as well as scanning inbound e-mails. Their spam signature (which is NOT a valid signature block -- and they know it) makes the sender look stupid for saying "It's clean. I promise." Uh huh. That's like spam saying it's not spam. Must be so because they say so. Uh huh. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DZbSlkFoSU The Mail Shield module affords no more protection than already does their on-access (aka real-time) scanner. MIME parts within e-mails can't do anything. They are just very long text strings that encode the binary attachment. Not until you extract the attachment AND RUN it can it do anything (if executable). Once you do the extraction, the on-access scanner will check the output file where the attachment got saved into. I use Avast. Its Mail Shield module is superfluous. Uninstall it. No more problems with spam pseudo-signatures. No timeout errors by the local e-mail client or e-mail server due to the time to interrogate the e-mail traffic. No corruption of e-mail content. No interference with accessing the server by the client because a transparent local proxy through which all the e-mail traffic passes through happened to go dead. Quite a few modules are superfluous in Avast or are lurewa - Mail Shield - superfluous. - Software Updater - nagware, makes incorrect assumptions, prods users to update when everything is working okay. - Browser Cleanup - superfluous. Use CCleaner. - Security browser extension - superfluous, only works in some web browsers. Use to be called WebRep (Web Reputation) but nothing changed when they changed the name. Like McAfee's Site Advisor and WOT (Web of Trust), the attempt is to rate web sites as safe, unknown, or dangerous. Less than 1% of web sites are in their database, the ratings are from users voting on bad or good (and general users are hardly expert users - read the WOT forums to see they are mostly boobs). The vast majority of sites will be rated Unknown - so the webrep feature is worthless. - SafePrice - lureware. - SecurelineVPN - lureware. - Passwords - superfluous. Another program that wants to manage your site passwords instead of using the web browser's own password manager. - Cleanup - superfluous. CCleaner is better. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|