Konqueror vs IE

Many people have been bashing windows for integrating windows with the os, ie, but I am curious how konqueror is different. I don't use Konqueror, so I may simply be missing the obvious, but doesn't Konqueror integrate the browser with the file manger? Would this allow any exploit in konqueror to have the same affect as an ie os exploit, except that linux actauly implements user restrictions? Is konqueror some how built more securely from the ground up to prevent such catastrophic exploits

[Chas.H]

That is an interesting question.

I use Konqueror as a file browser, even though it needed a bit of a twisted hack to make it work the way I want on Gnome. The reason I use it is simple, I used Knoppix for about a month before installing Fedora. It was the default file browser in that environment, so that's what I got used to. I use Firefox as the internet broswer, so no worries there.

As far as security holes, I never worried about it because of the open source nature of Linux. With all those coders looking at everything, it's a good bet that there are people looking at security issues, and either checking in fixes or reporting any flaws. Why would a hacker try to keep up with all that when there is easy pickings with the OS 98% of the world is using now?

[crackers]

The main difference is that IE is integrated with the OS, not just the file manager, and that it was specifically constructed so that it was easy to access OS-specific functionality, like what to do with a certain type of file. In Konqueror, there are the same kind of file associations, but they get handed off to other user-space programs (e.g. the KParts) through direct invocation, not via RPC calls. (Yes, you read that right - Windows uses RPC calls all over the place instead of direct invocation.) That keeps the execution in user-space.

[Chas.H]

Not knowing what crackers was talking about led me to google up this link.

Just thought I'd share it with the world.

[Shadow Skill]

Reading that does not make me feel good at all....I have raised a simillar question before but after reading this I am pretty sure Konqueror won't allow someone to nuke your system like IE can.

[GreyGeek]

That Konqueror is both a web browser and file manager is because the web is just a file system using the TCP/IP protocol, and it makes sense to integrate them into a single application. Konqueror is usually runs user space using mime type linking to activate actions *initiated BY the user*, unlike RPC calls in which the remote PC/host summons an API method exposed by a service (daemon) running on the user's PC. The deamon may have more rights than the user and the remote host may be able to escalate its rights by some attack against the daemon.

You are perfectly safe running Konqueror on the web. I've been doing so since Konqueror was first released and it is my prefered browser, although I am playing with FireFox right now.

[Chas.H]

Konqueror as a internet browser has some bugs to work out. It doesn't render tables with absolute positions quite right. One website I program, Booke Seminars there are some hidden tables that are submenu item of the main menu across the top. Mouse over them and they are rendered correctly in Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, and (with some JS coaxing, M$IE). In Konqueror the tables are all broken up. I might be able to use JS to account for that difference like I did for M$IE, but the target audience is almost all (if not all) using some flavour of M$ windows; so why bother?

[Psquared]

Originally Posted by Chas.H

Konqueror as a internet browser has some bugs to work out. It doesn't render tables with absolute positions quite right. One website I program, Booke Seminars there are some hidden tables that are submenu item of the main menu across the top. Mouse over them and they are rendered correctly in Firefox, Mozilla, Opera, and (with some JS coaxing, M$IE). In Konqueror the tables are all broken up. I might be able to use JS to account for that difference like I did for M$IE, but the target audience is almost all (if not all) using some flavour of M$ windows; so why bother?

I know what you mean Charles. I use Firefox, but I have tried the others and I can't get the tables across the top to display correctly at this site. www.thestate.com It's the main newspaper in SC (where I am from) and it looks terrible in every webbrowser I've tried in Linux. (Except Epiphany - which I have not tried yet)

But back to the issue at hand - that link you posted about RPCs is mostly greek to me, but it does look vaguely like a Microsoft "hacker's blueprint."

[Jman]

And for Gnome, Nautilus is not only the file manager but also the desktop shell. When was the last time you heard of a Nautilus exploit?

The concept is the same, but I think Windows Explorer is integrated at a lower level. If someone could confirm or deny this, go right ahead.

[Psquared]

Can Nautilus work in KDE?

[sailor]

I use Konqueror for file manager only, I also like to use Midnight Commander, but I wish someone would make a dual pane filemanager for linux that works like WinCommander(MC is close)
I always find multi-function applications lacking in some of the functions.


Firefox for web browsing...

[crackers]

Originally Posted by Jman

The concept is the same, but I think Windows Explorer is integrated at a lower level. If someone could confirm or deny this, go right ahead.

Yes, it's tightly bound to the OS itself and uses RPC calls to "Ring 0" (basically kernel-level) services for some of the functionality. That's why you could write VBScript or buffer-exploit viruses that can (and will) re-write the Registry, as well as hide themselves from the process manager, and all those other *cough* "neat" things.