Internet Explorer 9 utterly dominates malware-blocking stats

Internet Explorer 9's dual-pronged approach to blocking access to malicious URLs—SmartScreen Filter to block bad URLs, and Application Reputation to detect untrustworthy executables—provides the best socially engineered malware blocking of any stable browser version, according to NSS Labs' latest report. Internet Explorer 9 blocked 92 percent of malware with its URL-based filtering, and 100 percent with Application-based filtering enabled. Internet Explorer 8, in second place, blocked 90 percent of malware. Tied for third place were Safari 5, Chrome 10, and Firefox 4, each blocking just 13 percent. Bringing up the rear was Opera 11, blocking just 5 percent of malware.

The study only looked at sites that depended on tricking users into installing malicious software; anything that used browser flaws to run wasn't included in the test. The focus was also exclusively on malware targeting European users, though Internet Explorer 9 has also scored highly in other tests by the company with a global purview. The URLs visited were harvested from spam e-mails, instant messages, and social network posts.

The essentially identical performance of Firefox, Safari, and Chrome is because they use the same source data for their URL blacklisting: Google's Safe Browsing system. Some differences in lag were noticed—Firefox appeared to block bad URLs a little quicker than the other browsers—but overall performance was the same. Opera uses a service operated by anti-virus vendor AVG. Though it scored poorly, its 5 percent nonetheless represents an improvement on the zero percent it used to achieve, prior to integration of that feature. Opera was also substantially slower at blocking sites, averaging 48 hours to block, rather than 13 hours for the other browsers.

Internet Explorer's SmartFilter URL scanner yielded substantially better results than the other browsers tested. The Application Reputation feature then picked up any malicious executables that the URL scanner didn't trap. This shows the potential value of the Application Reputation feature; applications earn reputation by being downloaded regularly. An executable that nobody else has ever downloaded has no reputation at all, and so Internet Explorer 9 warns about the file. This means that its behavior is the reverse of the other filtering options in both Internet Explorer and other browsers: they default to permitting access to unknown URLs (as to do otherwise would break the majority of the Internet), only blocking locations that appear problematic. Application Reputation defaults to blocking.

http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2011/07/internet-explorer-9-utterly-dominates-malware-blocking-stats.ars

Good news for PC users!!!

It seems to work okay, but I'm not very wide-ranging on the net, either.

and I'm not at all surprised that Opera, using AVG is last @ 5%. I quit using AVG when I found malware masquerading as AVG. The avg.exe had been compromised.

And this also makes sense to me because I feel Microsoft Security Essentials is the absolute best around at blocking malware.

easy to clean. New varity of the old ransomware.

that i am going to have to get hubby to look at.

i cant hardly go into a site without a box popping up asking me if i want to go into an unsecured (or something) area. regular site. cnn. amazon. msnbc.

it has been a pain in the ass. not to mention my du page refreshes even when i am backing out... i hate it. and now i am not getting threads and post to change color showing i went into them

whatever this shit is, seems like it is fuckin with my computer.

will wait to update to 9 then based on your experience.

which is why it's use is on the decline...



http://www.infoworld.com/t/web-browsers/internet-explorer-market-share-continues-sink-912

Don't know whether that might have made a difference.

measures to protect my computer save for what came with my machine and I never have security issues. Not ever.

Where are all these threats coming from? People surfing porn or file-sharing sites? Where are people encountering these issues?

from a bulletin board when I was running DOS 3.1

up on a fake antivirus (or other trojan) site. Not being completely savvy, or in a hurry, they click OK or the 'X' and get into trouble...

hoot hoot you gots you some Lintx ha ha ha......:eyes:

with the fact that Internet Explorer has been the bane of the Internet for 20 years.

:eyes:

and we never bother to do the same in your threads. Is it the need to pretend you are superior to the rest of us because YOU chose an operating system not used in schools or for the most part across corporate America.

So proud you are of your skills.



Meh.

a pretty good job with FireFox 5. A message is displayed every time it blocks from a a bad site.

It also does better virus scanning - found 6 before I bought it, when my usual favorite Prevx only found 2.

I've told people to clean up their system with the free version,
they were so impressed they immediately paid for the lifetime subscription.

So they can turn a piece of shit into something that smells good ...after 15 years of fixes. Fuck MS.

not gloating, it's what makes me better than you.

Their tests are laughable.

That seems like a pretty important qualifier. I'd like to see a comparison that included that as well. Also, compare to the latest versions of the competition, not a generation or two ago.

my 2¢

It won't work on XP and isn't cross-platform so I won't be using it.

I've used Linux (w/Firefox browser) for 5 years now and I have had absolutely zero malware and virus issues.

I couldn't even remember what it was like to have to worry about that all the time, except that at work we use windows on our POS computer. Persistent virus and malware problems there were finally solved by unplugging that one from the net and getting a second net-only computer - running Linux.

Seriously, no love (lost) for Bill Gates here.

A similar report declaring IE9 beta the winner a couple of years ago was funded by Microsoft, according to PCMag. PCMag said, "The test, funded by Microsoft, reported a 99 percent detection rate by Internet Explorer 9 beta..." http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374344,00.asp


The report before that one (in 2009) was similarly funded by Microsoft. See article from 2008 on the previous report: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9130342/IE8_best_at_blocking_malware_sites_says_study?intsrc=news_ts_head


I therefore find it suspicious that the same company now claims they received no funding from vendors. Who funded it then?

Oook Oook OOK!

Bill Gates and IE can go... never mind.