Google Chrome 3 versión estable disponible

darksch escribió:Mientras no mejoren la seguridad que es más importante al coñón del Javascript muy mal, buscad sobre test de seguridad y ya veréis.

Y luego las contraseñas guardadas las puede ver cualquiera, están sin proteger, Firefox tiene su contraseña maestra para proteger nuestros datos.

Yo lo probé y me gustó bastante pero por el tema de la seguridad lo descarté, aunque me sirvió para tunear el Firefox y ponerlo al estilo Chrome, con menos barra arriba (espacio desperdiciado con menús), sacando los marcadores con Ctrl+B, hay que currárselo un poco pero queda muy bien.

Chrome 3 doesn't bring much new to the areas of security and privacy. It maintains all the security features available in previous versions, which aren't exactly market-leading, but they're something.

SafeBrowsing supplies the same anti-malware and -phishing protections you'll find in Firefox 3; you'll even see a similar red warning page if you try to surf onto a bad site. Chrome's developers claim that SafeBrowsing is now faster, more reliable, and uses the disk less often.

The browser supports SSL and can show Extended Validation SSL information, but it doesn't support SSL client authentication, which lets developers authenticate users accessing the server by exchanging a client certificate. Nor does Chrome offer IE8's protections against cross-site scripting and clickjacking. This browser is hardly as big a target for hackers as IE, but that's still no reason not to implement rigorous security.

That's especially true since reports of Chrome vulnerabilities and corresponding exploits have already surfaced. For example, carpet-bombing malware exists that can attack weaknesses in the WebKit engine and Windows and escape the segmented tabs to kill the whole browser. This can happen when you download and double-click on Java archive files. Unlike regular programs, these don't produce Windows' standard warning about running downloaded programs. Some security experts have also pointed out that Chrome's blending of pieces from Firefox and WebKit creates more opportunities for hackers to find security openings.

To help protect from crashes due to both malicious and poorly coded sites, Chrome runs each tab in a separate process. If a site on one tab freaks out, it won't take down the whole browser. Chrome shares this approach with IE8, but Google's browser takes the implementation a couple of welcome steps further, isolating plug-ins (such as Flash) as well as tabs and offering a Task Manager for your open tabs and add-ins. I haven't seen either of these capabilities in any other browser yet.

In addition to isolating simultaneous tab processes, Chrome does so sequentially: As you move to a different domain within a single tab, the browser throws out the earlier tab process and starts a new one, just in case the previous site caused memory leaks. I worried about the effect this would have on the Back button and whether the application would remember the session information from the earlier site, but I didn't run into any problems during testing. I was able to check my webmail using the Back button even after moving to another site, for example

Mario_MB4 escribió:Y en Mac seguimos esperando...

Yo seguiré con mi Firefox hasta que pueda darle una oportunidad al Chrome igual que se la dí a safari.

Kubrick escribió:Teniendo en cuenta que google vive de la publicidad no creo que sea posible jamás navegar sin ver publicidad con este navegador.