Forum Thread: Opera: PSI requires beta version

You are currently viewing a forum thread in the Secunia Community Forum. Please note that opinions expressed here are not of Secunia but solely reflect those of the user who wrote it.

This thread was submitted in the following forum:
All Threads

This thread has been marked as locked.
Anselm Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 09:44
Ranking: 7
Posts: 40
User Since: 7th Jul, 2008
System Score: N/A
Location: DE
Hello,

I just run PSI. It complained an obsolete Opera version. Using Opera I checked for an update, but it reported I use the newest version. So I downloaded and installed the newest version provided by PSI. I am astonished that this is version 10.50 beta. I dislike beta versions. Did PSI provide the Opera beta by mistake?

Regards, Anselm

--
Secunia PSI 3.0
Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit SP1
Intel Core i5-2430M CPU 2.4 GHz 8 GB RAM

This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 09:54
Last edited on 5th Mar, 2010 09:54 Hi,

What information make you think 10.50 is beta?
The opera website (http://www.opera.com/) delivers 10.50 as the primary download on Windows machines (though 10.50 isn't yet available for GNU/Linux).

The PSI doesn't provide, or even detect, beta versions. We track most software, but beta software is an exception.

Hope this helps.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 10:15
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
I have Firefox 3.6 , Opera 10.50 and IE8 on my PC and PSI indentifies all three as being "Not secure for browsing,at least 1 critical factor exists when using this browser.
Given that 3.6 and 10.50 are the latest patched versions of these browsers is there any browser that PSI considers safe to use and does not constitute a major threat to the user?
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 10:21
Last edited on 5th Mar, 2010 10:22 Hi,

The Secure browsing tab frequently highlights problems for which there are no patches yet. This changes over time, and is intended to help you decide which risks you want to take when surfing.

Without recommending any browser over the other, to answer your question I can say that of the 4 browser I have installed (Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera) only Chrome *currently* has no known vulnerabilities, provided you apply all patches.

Hope this helps.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 10:32
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
Hi,

I have applied all the patches. I check several times a week to make sure they are all up to date.
I have just noticed that there is a difference between the "patched" and "secure browsing screens" in PSI i.e. the degrees of danger are different.
In "patched" the results are as follows:
Firefox 3.6 : No threat
Opera 10.50: Cat 3
IE8: Cat 5
In "secure browsing" the results are as follows:
Firefox3.6 : Cat 4
Opera 10.50 : Cat 4
IE8 : Cat 3
Not one of the three is the same in the two PSI screens.
What is happening?

Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Secunia Official 5th Mar, 2010 10:37
Hi

The Vulnerabillity. cat rating listed next to a program in the "Patched" tab is the severeness if you had NOT patched. (But you have)

The rating in "Secure Browsing" refers to the highest unpatched vulnerability.

I hope this answered your question.
Anselm RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 10:53
Score: 7
Posts: 40
User Since: 7th Jul 2008
System Score: N/A
Location: DE
Last edited on 5th Mar, 2010 10:55
When I started the updated Opera it showed a site entiteled "Willkommen zur Opera 10.50 Beta". Now I checked "About Opera", and this reports "Version
10.50, Build 3296" (not beta). Anyway Opera itself didn't require the update but PSI did.

--
Secunia PSI 3.0
Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit SP1
Intel Core i5-2430M CPU 2.4 GHz 8 GB RAM
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 10:54
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
Hi,

I must say I don't fully understand what you have written:
1. "The Vulnerabillity. cat rating listed next to a program in the "Patched" tab is the severeness if you had NOT patched. (But you have)

2. The rating in "Secure Browsing" refers to the highest unpatched vulnerability."

It appears to say Vulnerability refers to the level of danger IF the browser was used unpatched. If so then it tells me nothing as to the present state of the actual browser (plus patches) I am using.
Secure browsing appears also to tell me nothing about the actual state of the browser (plus patches) I am using but just a worst case scenario which may or may not apply.
Where exactly in PSI can I look to show me the actual state of the browser (plus patches) I am using as we speak. According to secure browsing I can't use any of them.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 11:05
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
http://secunia.com/advisories/38820/

This seems to cover 10.50 Opera.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 11:10
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
http://secunia.com/advisories/38608/

This discussion deals with Firefox and just exactly what is or is not meant by "verified".
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 12:17
Last edited on 5th Mar, 2010 12:25 Hi,

The patched tab shows which vulnerabilities you have already eliminated. The Insecure shows vulnerable programs you can (and therefore should) update.

The Secure Browsing tab is special, because it shows patches for software you can't do anything about. This is to help you decide which browser would be safe to use for surfing, as browser exploits put you at special risk (Since users often connect to strange websites). The Secure Browsing tab isn't saying you can't use any of the browsers, it just points out the risk associated with doing so.

(edit: addition)

Also, software you offer from your main site can't really be classified as beta. Opera seems to be using 10.50 as their "official" version, regardless of what the browser says when launching.

Hope this clarifies everything.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
Anselm RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 13:17
Score: 7
Posts: 40
User Since: 7th Jul 2008
System Score: N/A
Location: DE
on 5th Mar, 2010 12:17, wrote:
Also, software you offer from your main site can't really be classified as beta. Opera seems to be using 10.50 as their "official" version, regardless of what the browser says when launching.

Hope this clarifies everything.

Regardless of the "beta": PSI told that I should update. Opera told that I use the newest version. That's what I still don't understand.

--
Secunia PSI 3.0
Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit SP1
Intel Core i5-2430M CPU 2.4 GHz 8 GB RAM
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 13:32
Last edited on 5th Mar, 2010 13:35
on 5th Mar, 2010 13:17, Anselm wrote:
Regardless of the "beta": PSI told that I should update. Opera told that I use the newest version. That's what I still don't understand.


Hi,

Please refer to http://secunia.com/advisories/38546/

We base all the rules of the PSI/CSI and the advisories. If you refer to the Secunia Advisories, you will see which exploit needs to be patched, and which version is immune to the problem (if any).

Hope this helps.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 13:47
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
Hi Emil,

There are still a few inconsistencies but this is close enough.
It does appear however that, according to Securia, the user can only employ Google's Chrome as browser if he/she is to avoid the very serious consequences of using any other browser.
This would seem to be a very bold statement to say the least.
Anyway thanks for your time and trouble.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
This user no longer exists RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 14:02
Hi,

That is not at all what I said. You asked if I knew of any secure browsers, and of the 4 I currently have installed, Chrome is the only one with no unpatched vulnerabilities. Secunia does not condone any specific browser, and that choice is still left entirely to the user.

Keep in mind that Secunia only reports the vulnerabilities. We do not produce patches, or make any decisions relating to the patching procedures of other companies or organizations. Our links provide the vendors own upgrades, etc.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
steve33 RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 15:17
Score: 0
Posts: 8
User Since: 2nd Jan 2010
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
Hi Emil,

I also never said you "condoned" a particular browser nor did I say that choice was being taken from the user. However when you state for a browser:
"Assessment: Not secure for browsing" then you are doing more than "only reporting the vulnerabilities" you are in fact making a judgment based on the vulnerabilities.
However since I don't use Google's Chrome I will have to choose from one of the "Not secure for browsing" browsers and take my chances.
And yes, my tongue is indeed firmly in my cheek.

I do in fact find Securia PSI to be one of the most valuable tools I have for monitoring the software on my PC and I consult it very regularly

Again thanks for the swift and competent help.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0
highstream RE: Opera: PSI requires beta version
Member 5th Mar, 2010 17:58
Score: 6
Posts: 29
User Since: 19th Dec 2007
System Score: N/A
Location: N/A
Opera put out an update this morning (3298) that "Fixed a memory leak related to plugins." Don't know if that speaks to the issue, tho a scan still reports it as vulnerable.
Was this reply relevant?
+0
-0

This thread has been marked as locked.