Pale Moon 7.0 release delay!

[Moonchild]

To address bug #680802, the reason for Mozilla to pull Firefox 7.0 off the wire and address it for 7.0.1, the Pale Moon 7.0 release date will be pushed back a few days to make a new build and give it a test run.

IMHO it's still a border case (add-ons being hidden if the browser is updated while an add-on update/install is pending) but apparently considered by the community to be severe enough to make this staggered release.

This is why Mozilla needs extensive beta test cycles, and not a Chrome-like release schedule where things slip through.

[bladerunner]

Well, I know about some problems in Firefox 7.0 release - and in Pale Moon as well - and I understand delay, but hope the work on Pale moon 7.0 will be a little bit faster than usual, considering that Pale moon 6.x.exe is detected as "Highly Critical" by Secunia PSI -Secure Browsing page. The same ,of course, for Firefox 6.x.exe (I don't use Firefox, but it has been checked by some friends).

Regards

[minegroasprilla]

When you release PaleMoon7, I think you should make a comparison table to compare performance and speed in Firefox7 and PaleMoon7

[Moonchild]

hope the work on Pale moon 7.0 will be a little bit faster than usual, considering that Pale moon 6.x.exe is detected as "Highly Critical" by Secunia PSI -Secure Browsing page.

I'm sorry, but what bearing does an obviously flawed "secure browsing" tool have on the speed with which I release the browser?

"Cybercriminals are increasingly targeting private PCs (endpoints). Their entry points are vulnerabilities (certain code errors or bugs) in popular third party (non-Microsoft) programs, which are exploited and used as a gateway to compromise PCs and access confidential data such as passwords, online profiles, and bank details. Attacks exploiting vulnerable programs and plug-ins are rarely blocked by traditional anti-virus."

Do I smell a Microsoft bias there? MSIE is much worse as far as exploits go.
Also: if Firefox 6 and ilk were so critically flawed, do you really think that the community as a whole wouldn't be on Mozilla's case about it?

[Moonchild]

When you release PaleMoon7, I think you should make a comparison table to compare performance and speed in Firefox7 and PaleMoon7

I definitely plan to, but first I will have to focus on getting the bugs out and getting the x64 build to behave. One thing at a time.

[bladerunner]

hope the work on Pale moon 7.0 will be a little bit faster than usual, considering that Pale moon 6.x.exe is detected as "Highly Critical" by Secunia PSI -Secure Browsing page.

I'm sorry, but what bearing does an obviously flawed "secure browsing" tool have on the speed with which I release the browser?

"Cybercriminals are increasingly targeting private PCs (endpoints). Their entry points are vulnerabilities (certain code errors or bugs) in popular third party (non-Microsoft) programs, which are exploited and used as a gateway to compromise PCs and access confidential data such as passwords, online profiles, and bank details. Attacks exploiting vulnerable programs and plug-ins are rarely blocked by traditional anti-virus."

Do I smell a Microsoft bias there? MSIE is much worse as far as exploits go.
Also: if Firefox 6 and ilk were so critically flawed, do you really think that the community as a whole wouldn't be on Mozilla's case about it?

Well, it's really hard to say Secunia PSI is a "flawed" tool. There is no perfect software of course, but Secunia is not an antivirus, and it doesn't detect "False positive". The highly critical vulnerability in Pale Moon and in Firefox 6.x are accurately described - if you like I can post a link to the related Secunia Advisory.

About FF 6.x some people already switched to FF7; besides, not everyone use Secunia, or knows what it is.
I wrote that I hope in a faster work on Pale Moon 7 because Pale Moon6.x is not safe for browsing at the moment, so I hope Pale Moon 7 will be ready as soon as possible.
Hope everything is clear now.

Regards

[Moonchild]

If you don't give me anything to go on (i.e. what Secunia finds so critically flawed) i cannot assess the level of threat there is according to them or how accurately it has been described.

[bladerunner]

If you don't give me anything to go on (i.e. what Secunia finds so critically flawed) i cannot assess the level of threat there is according to them or how accurately it has been described.

Here is the link to the related Secunia Advisory http://secunia.com/advisories/46171/ . Hope this can help.

Regards

[megaman]

Well, it's really hard to say Secunia PSI is a "flawed" tool. There is no perfect software of course, but Secunia is not an antivirus, and it doesn't detect "False positive". The highly critical vulnerability in Pale Moon and in Firefox 6.x are accurately described - if you like I can post a link to the related Secunia Advisory.

There is a difference with being too paranoid and being correct with the target.

My avast! has yet to pop-up anything about Palemoon, but Emsisoft Antimalware does detect something. Checking my internet activity, nothing is being compromised so Emsisoft is sensitive but a powerful scanner.

Ouch, we are moving to 7, so it might have been fixed in FF7?

[Moonchild]

It will be fixed in Pale Moon 7.0

[PurpleSage]

I tried to download R4, both ZIP and installer, from the WIP page but all I got was a blank page. Has R4 been pulled until 7.0.1 is released? Thanks.

[Moonchild]

Ah, yes, R4 has been pulled because it had a few errors. The actual release is just around the corner though, so a little patience