Vulnerabilities / Threats
3/5/2012
12:30 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Chrome Shines Bright In Controversial Security Fight

Major browsers have all made solid strides in security in the past few years, but Chrome's sandbox makes Google's browser a harder target, researchers say at RSA.

RSA CONFERENCE 2012--San Francisco--The major browsers have all made solid strides in security in the past few years, but Chrome's sandbox makes Google's browser a harder target for attackers to exploit with malicious code, four researchers said Thursday in a presentation at the RSA Security Conference in San Francisco.

The group of researchers--all current or former employees of security consultancy Accuvant--gave conference attendees an in-depth tour of their results, which were published late last year. Some controversy has surrounded the security comparison because Google--the maker of the Chrome browser--funded the study.

Microsoft Internet Explorer's and Google Chrome's countermeasures made both browsers more secure on the metrics used by Accuvant, with Google's browser edging out Microsoft's in sandboxing technology, Shawn Moyer, practice manager for Accuvant, said.

"We focused heavily on exploitation mitigation in this paper," Moyer said. "We accepted that users will click on things and the browser will be exploited, but if you have something that you can use to contain the hack, you are going to raise the bar for attackers."

[ Catch up on our complete RSA 2012 Security Conference coverage. ]

The survey has been criticized by NSS Labs, a security testing firm that came to a different conclusion in a paper last year: Microsoft's SmartScreen URL reputation system helped Internet Explorer catch 96% of all malicious websites. Google's Chrome came in a distant second place, catching about 13% of websites.

At the RSA Conference, the researchers repeatedly stressed that their paper and methods are open. Anyone can review and redo the testing, Moyer argued. Moreover, they also pointed out that they could not replicate NSS Labs' findings. They found all three browsers were equally poor at catching malicious pages.

Chrome distanced itself from other browsers mainly because of its sandbox technology--a virtual playpen in which the browser runs but cannot impact other applications' data or the operating system. Internet Explorer has some sandboxing, but not as completely as Chrome, the researchers said. A strong sandbox helps keep the operating systems secure because a malicious program that runs inside the sandbox cannot access any system resources outside of the virtual machine.

Read the rest of this article on Dark Reading.

It's no longer a matter of if you get hacked, but when. In this special retrospective of news coverage, Monitoring Tools And Logs Make All The Difference, Dark Reading takes a look at ways to measure your security posture and the challenges that lie ahead with the emerging threat landscape. (Free registration required.)

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
eohippus
50%
50%
eohippus,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/5/2012 | 7:10:30 PM
re: Chrome Shines Bright In Controversial Security Fight
as interesting as the info is it google chrome allowed a parasite in and attacked my computer while using that browser it had to be removed by an outside source that parasite /malicious program came from a company called I Livid why did it not protect me from that if its sandtrap is so good ?
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-1544
Published: 2014-07-23
Use-after-free vulnerability in the CERT_DestroyCertificate function in libnss3.so in Mozilla Network Security Services (NSS) 3.x, as used in Firefox before 31.0, Firefox ESR 24.x before 24.7, and Thunderbird before 24.7, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via vectors that trigger cer...

CVE-2014-1547
Published: 2014-07-23
Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in the browser engine in Mozilla Firefox before 31.0, Firefox ESR 24.x before 24.7, and Thunderbird before 24.7 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory corruption and application crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors.

CVE-2014-1548
Published: 2014-07-23
Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in the browser engine in Mozilla Firefox before 31.0 and Thunderbird before 31.0 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory corruption and application crash) or possibly execute arbitrary code via unknown vectors.

CVE-2014-1549
Published: 2014-07-23
The mozilla::dom::AudioBufferSourceNodeEngine::CopyFromInputBuffer function in Mozilla Firefox before 31.0 and Thunderbird before 31.0 does not properly allocate Web Audio buffer memory, which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (buffer overflow and applica...

CVE-2014-1550
Published: 2014-07-23
Use-after-free vulnerability in the MediaInputPort class in Mozilla Firefox before 31.0 and Thunderbird before 31.0 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (heap memory corruption) by leveraging incorrect Web Audio control-message ordering.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Sara Peters hosts a conversation on Botnets and those who fight them.