They both "scored" 0/10. I did not include adguard, because it is not really designed to block malware and as for 9.9.9.9, it is hardly worth testing.
Q&A [Updated 29/12/2018] Browser extension comparison: Malwares and Phishings
- Thread starter Evjl's Rain
- Start date
Had the same problem with Edge Dev. TrafficLight not working reliable for me...Weird, i tested the links in Firefox with Trafficlight and none of them are blocked. But in Brave they are.
Edit: I have to open them two times to be detected in firefox
I see Trafficlight got an update to 3.0.8 and it kicks in like before, i just tried it and it responds first and than Edge dev smartscreen.
Last edited:
goodjohnjr
Level 1
Thank you @TairikuOkami , I am surprised and disappointed that they both did so poorly, I wonder why Quad9 DNS is doing so badly with all of those partnerships that they have and why do you think they are not worth testing?
Thank you,
-John Jr
The problem with DNS blocking is, that it blocks domains, not just links, so if it is too good, too aggressive, it breaks legitimate webpages as well.
Quad9 has a non-censored alternative (9.9.9.10), but also no DNSSEC, they do not propagate it much, because they focus on the main 9.9.9.9.
Adguard already blocks too much, because of ad blocking, it is not really a practical DNS for a normal browsing, you can not add exceptions.
Neustar in comparison has a variety to choose from, so if something gets blocked, customers can not blame it on them, it is clearly stated.
Neustar also blocks warez, that includes some streaming services, both legitimate and not, so common user would generally do not like it.
goodjohnjr
Level 1
Anyone using Norton safe web ? extension is available in Microsoft store for Edge dev chromium ... and any privacy concerns ?
Would that be a good replacement for BDTL , or should we not worry about BDTL privacy ? i see many other vendors do the same
thx
Would that be a good replacement for BDTL , or should we not worry about BDTL privacy ? i see many other vendors do the same
thx
norton safe web has been weak for a year
they focus on developing cloud engine rather than web protection
emsisoft was brilliant for a while but recently, it has been extremely weak
Last edited:
Thanks. Yes, TrafficlLight works as before with version 3.0.8
When it blocks before SmartScreen it also prevent for example cookies being set by the blocked site, unlike with a block from SmartScreen.
That kind of explains why I saw Ziggo Safe Online still blocking network traffic when a site was blocked by SmartScreen.
SmartScreen doesn't completely prevent a page from loading, it reacts when a page is loading.
Last edited:
Windows Defender Browser Protection or Microsoft Defender SmartScreen ?
Edge (Chromium)
Edge (Chromium)
Native Smartscreen, absolutely. If you browse dodgey sites, add Bitdefender Trafficlight.
Windows Defender Browser Protection is an extension for Google Chrome, but its inside Edge chromium and smartscreen...
i also use BDTL extension.
Last edited:
I've added WDBP to Edge (Chromium).
So, is WDBP exactly the same as MDSS?
WDBP seems to react before MDSS.
Both all cloud?
Yes, MDSS blocks mal downloads.
Just wondering whether they use same database?
They are similar, but not the same. The extensions react first I believe, which explains your experience. There is no point in keeping WDBP. Add BDTL if you want additional protection, e.g. it may catch phishing sites that SS misses.
I'm not wanting additional protection.
I'm new to playing with Edge (Chromium).
Just curious re WDBP vs MDSS.
Thanks
Hi @oldschool,
Appreciate you input, I believe MDSS is only on Windows OS (Please do correct me if I'm wrong).
So for users of alternative OS (E.g. Linux, ChromeOS) do you believe WDBP is still relevant?
Thanks.
Absolutely. I believe it's available for Firefox and certainly is for Chromium browsers.
It checks independent of the os all links with Microsoft.
See (Dutch) screenshot of the extension properties:
See (Dutch) screenshot of the extension properties:
