Windows 7: Firefox to block Silverlight and Java -- but not Flash

Read more at source:
Firefox to block Silverlight and Java -- but not Flash | Internet & Media - CNET News

Been expecting this against Java.... Silverlight?... not so much. Don't use either though.

Not surprised that Flash isn't blocked as it is widely used. Adobe have been putting out a lot of pacthes that covers up holes. I'm really not surprised in Java, in fact, it'll only help. For Silverlight though... it surprises me because I never heard bad things about it.

Silverlight never works on WaterFox the 64bit flavor of FF used here. I have to keep opening up IE windows whenever any page requires Silverlight. Often IE is used to pick up the slack of things that won't work on the WaterFox version mainly due to being 64bit but at times IE is required.

It seems Mozilla will be turning FF into a 32bit flavor of WaterFox instead of being the other way around as it has been. The big difference however will be with the "Click and Play" option that will likely be seen as a popup notification or a small toolbar that appears with a few options.

Had to many issues with FF-no longer trust it same thing for waterfox
Silverlight havn't even used it once
adobe has been putting out frequent updates i have seen one recently maybe a week ago

this Java thing is really bad but im sure there is no need to panic

The real question is can this new feature be disabled (possibly from about:config?) if the user wishes? I'm guessing not, Firefox has a bad track record with implementing new "features" that people don't necessarily want.

FireFox, WaterFox, Opera, Flock, Ice Weasel for Windows, etc. all have the preferences and options advanced settings for things like disabling scripting and controlling content. Dig deeper into the settings for the hidden items please!

The real problem remaining is simply not too many people ever pay attention to those settings since you have to spend a little more time going over things in the sub menus and tabs in those in order to secure the browser better. Most simply run with the defaults and call it a day while the hackers and malware writers know this as well and count on it!

The patches often simply raise the security by disabling something automatically you could have already seen to by going over each set of options. It's kind of like downloading a reg mod to make a change when you could have edited the value on one entry to see the same thing done at times.

Typically a new feature seen with any open source browser has been added in to simplify the task itself. The task can be anything you would need to be a programmer and write a script for otherwise.

As for the java runtime simply browsing at shopping sites and looking things up wouldn't call for it while you are on the web. For select sites with media players and other animations then flash player, shock player, and with MS sites Silverlight then comes into play far more frequently. When coming into a bad site however having all this support in the "ready to go" mode leaves the user a bit more wide open.

I wasn't suggesting that I (and others) refuse to look into as far as about:config (and possibly beyond?) to customize Firefox as we see fit, I was just asking because Mozilla has proven in the past to modify Firefox in ways that can't be addressed without additional extensions (the removal of the status bar and the "Properties" window come prominently to mind).

If the option to disable this feature is available at least within about:config then I'm a happy panda.

One should not have to learn to whistle and tap dance at the same time to make selection in a browser to make it safer. It should be as simple as one two three.

If you look in the Applications tab in the FF options you will find a list of things like Adobe where once you click to highlight each item you can select the ask each time, save file, use Adobe as default, or other just for Adobe reader. There you would expect to find a selection list for each of the other 14 items as well. Those will always see the Always ask.

Under IE's Tools>Options>Programs you will notice that you won't any list of apps like addons but the HTLM editor where NotePad is generally selected as the default as well as a separate area to manage addons when clicking that button to bring up a separate screen. Here that would see Adobe reader, Windows Live Assistant, Skype, and WOT(Web Of trust).

As you can see from that one section alone the open source browsers tend to divide things in order to list quite a bit more items when compared to IE there. In a sense that will automatically make things a little more complicated since this allows the user to make changes to individual items like the mail handler and web feed settings in FF or other while in IE you check or uncheck one or two main items to handle everything there.

On the other the Security section is far easier to ease the burden there with the open source browsers where you find only 3 items one regarding blocking web sites from stuffing unwanted addons on with the exceptions button as well. The other two block reported attack sites and block reported web forgeries. In IE you have four main zones when not simply leaving things set to the defaults there to go through numerous items which can be time consuming for most.

As you can see each browser will tend to have it's own Pros and Cons as far as ease of use or making things more involved. While FF may take out the status bar MS tool out the search box in IE 9 you used to always see in IE 8 and earlier versions of IE.

With Opera once the Unite was added in that more or less trashed the experience here as far as considering that for the default browser plus when setting Opera to open things every file opened or viewed then sees the Opera symbol. The older 9.63 and 9.64 releases always seem to prove to be the best over the latest.

With the Opera symbol stuffed on things however People ask how to get rid of those at times! Likewise some have simply given up on FireFox to use some other browser like Chrome since they found the latest FF versions to be "not so good"?! You would think the developers would want to simplify as much as possible while there are those times when you wish you had a programmer onhand to tweak things the way you want to see them.