full-disclosure - Re: OT: Firefox question / poll

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 21:32:38 +0900
From: 夜神　岩男 <supergiantpotato@...oo.co.jp>
To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: OT: Firefox question / poll

On 12/21/2011 03:54 AM, metasansana@...il.com wrote:
> I would say usability, by the time it pops up the nasty is probably already done.
> ------Original Message------
> From: Charles Morris
> Sender: full-disclosure-bounces@...ts.grok.org.uk
> To: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
> Subject: [Full-disclosure] OT: Firefox question / poll
> Sent: Dec 20, 2011 13:40
>
> I'm curious what everyone's opinion is on the following question...
> esp. to any FF dev people on list:
>
> Do you think that the Firefox "warning: unresponsive script" is meant
> as a security feature or a usability feature?

Usability.

To begin with, most people click through the DANGER SCREEN warnings 
about bad TLS certificates. With this in mind it is obvious that a 
developer can't expect the average browser-using population to even know 
what a script is.

However, the string("not responding") + situation("browser gets stuck") 
resonates with the average retard, so this approach is sensible from a 
usability standpoint.

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/