Hot Take [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

[Evjl's Rain]

Comparison between browser extensions

Test 29/12
Q&A - [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 24/11
Q&A - [Updated 24/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 12/11
Q&A - [Updated 12/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 7/11
Q&A - [Updated 7/11/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 6/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 3/9
Q&A - [Updated 3/9/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test 2/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Test, quick 1/9
Q&A - [Updated 25/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Fun test 25/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 24/7/2018 (most comprehensive, as possible)
Q&A - [Updated 24/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 19/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 18/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 10/7/2018
Q&A - [Updated 10/7/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 7/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 7/6/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 3/6/2018
Q&A - [Updated 3/6/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Updated 25/4/2018
Poll - [Updated 25/4/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings

Update: 23/3/2018
Poll - [Updated 23/3/18] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings


Browser: Google Chrome 65 x64
Malware and phishing links: 10 malc0de, 10 vxvault, 10 openphish, 10 verified phishtank, 10 unverified phishtank
Total: 50 links

Spoiler: Links

Dropbox - link test 17-3-2018.txt

Extensions: recently downloaded from Chrome Web Store
- Google Safe Browsing (built-in chrome's protection)
- AdGuard AdBlocker: default settings, uses Google Safe Browsing (delayed) and their own database
- Avira browser safety: default settings
- Norton Safe Web: default settings
- Bitdefender Trafficlight: default settings, it rarely blocks any malware links, just old ones
- Avast Online Security: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- Netcraft Extension: default settings, only has phishing protection, expected to score 0 against malwares
- uBlock Origin with some additional filters

Spoiler: ublock origin filters

http://hosts-file.net/emd.txt
http://hosts-file.net/exp.txt
http://hosts-file.net/pup.txt
http://hosts-file.net/psh.txt
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/StevenBlack/hosts/master/hosts
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_DOMBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_IPBL.txt
https://ransomwaretracker.abuse.ch/downloads/RW_URLBL.txt

NOTE: the result can vary from day-to-day. Tomorrow with different links, the result can be very different. All are live links but they can be dead a few minutes after the test. No duplication

Results:

Winner: Google Safe Browsing

 

[Moonhorse]

Osta Netcraft Extension – Microsoft Store fi-FI

The Netcraft Extension is a tool allowing easy lookup of information relating to the sites you visit and providing protection from Phishing and malicious JavaScript.

www.microsoft.com

Microsoft has added netcraft extension, to microsoft webstore for EdgeHTML edge browser

 

[Windows_Security]

Thanks for the information, just wondering why would they do that? They are migrating to Edge Chromium and on Chrome store Netcraft is already available? M$ dropped their mobile OS, why would they invest in adding new extensions on old platform? Something is strange or Microsoft is up to something. Anyone more info on this?

 

[Back3]

Just wondering what is the best security combo for Firefox. My antivirus is Windows Defender. I already have installed TrafficLight. Thanks

 

[goodjohnjr]

Hello,

Can someone name all the security browser extensions that can also scan downloads?

Also can someone name all the security browser extensions (other than Emsisoft Browser Security and Windows Defender Browser Protection that I believe already do this) that uses hashs of URLs instead of full URLs when sending them to be checked by their blacklists et cetera?

Thank you,
-John Jr

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Can someone name all the security browser extensions that can also scan downloads?

all extensions I test can block downloads: bitdefender, WDBP, comodo, emsisoft, avira, malwarebytes, norton,...
also browsers built-in protection: chrome, edge

Note that, sometimes, WDBP warns about the mailicious file but fails to block them. It's a known bug => if you see a block message, do not execute the downloaded file

about hash checking, I have no idea, I need to find more information

 

[goodjohnjr]

all extensions I test can block downloads: bitdefender, WDBP, comodo, emsisoft, avira, malwarebytes, norton,...
also browsers built-in protection: chrome, edge

Note that, sometimes, WDBP warns about the mailicious file but fails to block them. It's a known bug => if you see a block message, do not execute the downloaded file

about hash checking, I have no idea, I need to find more information

Hello Evjl's Rain,

I feel dumb now, thank you for answering that.

On Firefox I was looking at the permissions for Avira Browser Safety, Malwarebytes Browser Extension, Bitdefender TrafficLight, and Emsisoft Browser Security; and only Malwarebytes had this permission: "Download files and read and modify the browser’s download history", and so I thought that it was the only one that could scan downloads but I guess that this permission would allow them to do this: "Access your data for all websites"?

I still have not decided which of these extensions I like the best because they all have their cons and pros that has kept me from choosing one or more, I just keep following this thread, and sometimes trying them again.

Thank you for responding,
-John Jr

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I still have not decided which of these extensions I like the best because they all have their cons and pros that has kept me from choosing one or more, I just keep following this thread, and sometimes trying them again.

I prefer using bitdefender and microsoft because they are proven to be effective (not necessarily the best but above there) and most importantly they are very light (WDBP is one of the lightest, BD is heavier)

emsisoft is lighter than BD but ineffective so I must drop it

avira and malwarebytes are noticeably heavier than the others so I don't want them

 

[goodjohnjr]

I prefer using bitdefender and microsoft because they are proven to be effective (not necessarily the best but above there) and most importantly they are very light (WDBP is one of the lightest, BD is heavier)

emsisoft is lighter than BD but ineffective so I must drop it

avira and malwarebytes are noticeably heavier than the others so I don't want them

Hello Evjl's Rain,

They are definitely lighter and have improved as you have done these tests.

I am disappointed that Emsisoft Browser Security has not been improving and has not even been updated in a while, and I hope that this trend improves before it becomes like the Comodo extension(s).

I remember the Avira extension being the heaviest in RAM usage at least back when I tried it last year, it and the Malwarebytes extension have a lot of potential, but they do need to improve in that area. (Avira would probably benefit from using Ublock Origin's codebase for adblocking, and so would Malwarebytes which has the worst adblocking of the two)

Malwarebytes has several bugs that still have not been fixed, Emsisoft still has a bug, Bitdefender has several bugs, et cetera; and so I hope that each of them will fix those eventually.

Thank you for responding,
-John Jr

 

[Brie]

with adguard desktop is BD traffic light, WDBP, Emsisoft or Netcraft needed?

thanks in advance.

 

[oldschool]

with adguard desktop is BD traffic light, WDBP, Emsisoft or Netcraft needed?

thanks in advance.

I doubt it because the desktop version provides more comprehensive protection than the extension, but my view is based on reading rather than experience with the product. Here is one example: Extension vs. Windows app

And here’s another reference: How malware protection works | AdGuard Knowledgebase

Based on my reading you’re good to go with desktop AdGuard only. I may have to try the Beta version if they still offer it for free.

 

[Brie]

And here’s another reference: How malware protection works | AdGuard Knowledgebase

Based on my reading you’re good to go with desktop AdGuard only. I may have to try the Beta version if they still offer it for free.

thank you for replying.

 

[oldschool]

thank you for replying.

You are most welcome, young lady!

 

[Evjl's Rain]

New test especially for Malwarebytes 2.0
19 links from urlhaus + 6 .js or .jpg files (non-downloadable, only downloadable on right-click -> save...

Spoiler: links

link test 27/8/19 - Pastebin.com

pastebin.com

chrome 15/19 + 0/6 = 15/26
avira 13/19 + 3/6 = 16/26
emsisoft 14/19 + 4/6 = 18/26
malwarebytes 0/19 + 0/6 => fixed => 26/26
Norton 7/19 + 1/6 = 8/26
BDTL 16/19 + 5/6 = 21/26
WDBP 18/19 + 3/6 = 21/26

When first updated malwarebytes, it did not block any malwares or ads, nothing. I went to settings -> unchecked protection -> re-checked -> working

 

[Back3]

New test especially for Malwarebytes 2.0
19 links from urlhaus + 6 .js or .jpg files (non-downloadable, only downloadable on right-click -> save...

Spoiler: links

link test 27/8/19 - Pastebin.com

pastebin.com

chrome 15/19 + 0/6 = 15/26
avira 13/19 + 3/6 = 16/26
emsisoft 14/19 + 4/6 = 18/26
malwarebytes 0/19 + 0/6 => fixed => 26/26
Norton 7/19 + 1/6 = 8/26
BDTL 16/19 + 5/6 = 21/26
WDBP 18/19 + 3/6 = 21/26

When first updated malwarebytes, it did not block any malwares or ads, nothing. I went to settings -> unchecked protection -> re-checked -> working

Do you still recommend Chrome with BDTL and WDBP ?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

Do you still recommend Chrome with BDTL and WDBP ?

yes, of course. They work well and extremely lightweight
3 of them combined might be lighter than malwarebytes alone or avira alone

 

[stefanos]

New test especially for Malwarebytes 2.0
19 links from urlhaus + 6 .js or .jpg files (non-downloadable, only downloadable on right-click -> save...

Spoiler: links

link test 27/8/19 - Pastebin.com

pastebin.com

chrome 15/19 + 0/6 = 15/26
avira 13/19 + 3/6 = 16/26
emsisoft 14/19 + 4/6 = 18/26
malwarebytes 0/19 + 0/6 => fixed => 26/26
Norton 7/19 + 1/6 = 8/26
BDTL 16/19 + 5/6 = 21/26
WDBP 18/19 + 3/6 = 21/26

When first updated malwarebytes, it did not block any malwares or ads, nothing. I went to settings -> unchecked protection -> re-checked -> working

Just now i test BDTL at Opera browser the results is 23/26 one blocked from Opera
this miss

 

[stefanos]

Avira extension + Avira web filter at Opera browser 23/26
this miss

 

[Burrito]

New test especially for Malwarebytes 2.0
19 links from urlhaus + 6 .js or .jpg files (non-downloadable, only downloadable on right-click -> save...

Spoiler: links

link test 27/8/19 - Pastebin.com

pastebin.com

chrome 15/19 + 0/6 = 15/26
avira 13/19 + 3/6 = 16/26
emsisoft 14/19 + 4/6 = 18/26
malwarebytes 0/19 + 0/6 => fixed => 26/26
Norton 7/19 + 1/6 = 8/26
BDTL 16/19 + 5/6 = 21/26
WDBP 18/19 + 3/6 = 21/26

When first updated malwarebytes, it did not block any malwares or ads, nothing. I went to settings -> unchecked protection -> re-checked -> working

Malwarebytes Browser Guard (MBG) aced it.

That's good to know.

Thanks @Evjl's Rain.

The new GUI is a major improvement over the old.

Very good.

 

[BoraMurdar]

@Evjl's Rain seems that using Chromium Egde with Smart Screen filtering enabled gives the same level of browser protection as using Chrome + WDBP?

 

[Evjl's Rain]

@Evjl's Rain seems that using Chromium Egde with Smart Screen filtering enabled gives the same level of browser protection as using Chrome + WDBP?

I think chrome + WDBP combo is better because there are 2 vs. 1 engine
edge is better than WDBP
moreover, when something is downloaded from a browser, when we execute it, it will be checked with windows smartscreen

that's why I prefer using products from different vendors than several products from 1 vendor