A couple of snippets concerning Google’s new Chrome browser:
Pop-ups not shown, but Advertisers billed?
It seems like Chrome’s new Pop-Up hider still loads the Pop-Up ads, but doesn’t present them to the viewer.
This is somewhat different to how traditional Pop-Up blockers work, in that they actually prevent the ad from loading. Our understanding of that approach is that this means the Advertiser wouldn’t be charged, as their ad is not loading.
The situation with Chrome may well be different, as the ad is being loaded but not shown, which could lead to advertisers still being charged for Pop-Ups that no one will ever see.
For Pop-Up haters that’s fine, but if true and if Chrome grabs a significant portion of the Browser market, then this could well lead to changes in advertising methods.
Google promotes Firefox, oops!
In a very public spirited gesture, it seems that Google (via YouTube at least) is still advertising Firefox, even after the launch of Chrome.
Whether this is an oversight on Google’s part, or a requirement of their agreement with Mozilla we don’t know. Is Google still the default search engine bundled with Firefox installs, as per their agreement (which was re-negotiated earlier this year)? If so, how much longer will this arrangment last?
Thanks to Raja of MrFeedback.net for the heads up about the Firefox ad in Youtube.
This is a guest post contributed by Raja of MrFeedback
We have seen privacy introduced in Internet Explorer 8 (beta 2 version) & Google Chrome, and Firefox has recently announced that private browsing will be incorporated into their browser in version 3.1 – currently you can get private browsing mode by downloading the Stealther 1.06 plugin available through Download.com, and there are similar solutions available from Mozilla’s add on website.
The concept behind Privacy mode is simple – any record of your browsing history is discarded once you close the browser session in IE or Google Chrome. Firefox plan to take this feature a few steps further and will have:
- no autofill for passwords
- all cookies will be discarded after browsing
- all downloads in Download Manager will be discarded after browsing
- Unlike IE, you won’t even be able to tell if you’re surfing in Private Mode. IE has a neon indicator to announce the activation of private mode. Firefox will keep the fact that you’re surfing in private mode, well..private. Nice feature.
Private surfing is useful, despite the obvious concern that it will assist people to do things on the internet which are questionable. As internet shopping becomes the norm, it will enable people to keep gift purchases, for example, and other activities private. It’s good that browsers are installing this feature, despite it inevitably being misused by a percentage of people.
I’d love to hear any comments or feedback on Privacy mode and Browser security in general.
Raja Devanathan
Founder of MrFeedback.net
If you would like to guest post or have a post/review written, please get in touch via our Contact page. Standard rates for paid posts/reviews can be found on the Advertising page.
Just a few days after public release, vulnerabilities in Google’s Chrome browser have already been publicised. Ramifications of an attack could range from an application crash to remote malware installation.
The first vulnerability was found on Wednesday by researcher Aviv Raff, who discovered that the browser was open to a highly-publicised ‘carpet bombing’ attack first found in Safari. The Safari hole was patched earlier this year, but because Chrome uses Apple’s WebKit software, the flaw has reappeared in the Google browser.
A proof of concept page was published demonstrating how an attacker could embed malicious code on a web page and then use it to conduct a remote malware installation with a separate specially-crafted Java applet.
Then researchers Rishi Narang and JanDeMooij posted separate reports of a vulnerability in the browser’s chromium.dll component that was exposed through the browser’s URL bar. The flaw can be made to cause an application crash, though neither report mentioned the possibility of remote code execution.
