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

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Thx for doing this new test, seeing Emsisoft Browser Security getting better results than Bitdefender TraffictLight is surprising also that Malwarebytes Browser Guard phishing result is terrible

I didn't have good results either with Malwarebytes
Anyway I did have times were emsisoft had better results then bitdefender and sometimes opposite

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

New Test, this time only Browser Extensions/Addons - overall 10 links (5x Phishing / 5x Malware.exe)

​	Phishing ​	Malware ​
Avast Online Security​	5/5​	0/5​
Avira Browser Safety​	4/5​	5/5​
Bitdefender TrafficLight​	4/5​	4/5​
Malwarebytes Browser Guard​	0/5​	5/5​
McAfee WebAdvisor​	5/5​	5/5​
Emsisoft Browser Security​	5/5​	5/5​
Norton Safe Web​	5/5​	0/5​
SafeToOpen Online Security​	2/5​	3/5​
Osprey Browser Protection​	5/5​	5/5​

5 pishing and 5 malware links is an easy target for osprey and would be better if you tested extensions that aren't including in osprey providers

for example Norton is already in osprey and avast is the same as Norton and bitdefender is already included in osprey as well as emsisoft

 

[silversurfer]

5 pishing and 5 malware links is an easy target for osprey and would be better if you tested extensions that aren't including in osprey providers

for example Norton is already in osprey and avast is the same as Norton and bitdefender is already included in osprey as well as emsisoft

Well, some forum people here requested exactly that Test with all Browser Extensions included in that test, so your suggestion makes no sense in this case
Edit: I could only exclude Osprey for the next test but then someone might asking Osprey should be tested as well...

 

[Jonny Quest]

Well, some forum people here requested exactly that Test with all Browser Extensions included in that test, so your suggestion makes no sense in this case

Yep, because a lot of us still use a single browser extension, so it is very helpful to see them tested independently (compared to the bundled Osprey extension). I'm still just going to use Eset's and uBlock as my main browser extensions.

 

[silversurfer]

I agree that more links like 50 would be a more accurate test but who has enough time for that, the problem is you have to test ALL links one after another again for each requested Browser Extension (9 overall in that case), time consuming...

 

[Digmor Crusher]

Maybe the "go to" extensions that all anyone needs now may be Osprey and UBO.

 

[oldschool]

Maybe the "go to" extensions that all anyone needs now may be Osprey and UBO.

It's basically already happened with forum regulars, from the look of the Osprey threads.

 

[Jonny Quest]

It's basically already happened with forum regulars, from the look of the Osprey threads.

Most of them, but I'll pass for now I'm still not sure of having to many options enabled and possibly causing FP's, or webpage, surfing issues? I'll keep it simple for my simpler browsing habits

 

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Yep, uBO Lite and Osprey here
Osprey with the defaults minus Symantec because of a false positive with the AMTSO website.
Blocking the whole website will give good results in testing, but not for usability.
So, I have these enabled in Osprey: Emsisoft, Bitdefender, Norton. G DATA, DNS0.eu, CleanBrowsing and Switch.ch.

 

[Parkinsond]

Another extension is ScamAdvisor. Sadly it is not available for Firefox.

More informatation at: Download the ScamAdviser App & Browser Extension.

Get blocked when trying to open using Yandex, while I opens normally using Edge.

 

[Foulest]

Get blocked when trying to open using Yandex, while I opens normally using Edge.View attachment 288593

That seems to be a Cloudflare issue.

 

[Parkinsond]

That seems to be a Cloudflare issue.

Cloudflare is not playing nicely with Yandex.

 

[cartaphilus]

The problem is that NextDNS doesn't block Youtube ads, am i wrong?

YouTube ads are instream hard coded ips via their own encrypted DNS. To block them you have to actively inspect the data stream and not just the destination/source. Hence it's possible do via ublock origin or AdGuard. via (run YouTube via ADGuard) since they inspect the bitstream.

Moded YouTube Vanced just strips the decoders.

 

[Kongo]

Just found this one: FMHY SafeGuard – Get this Extension for Firefox (en-US)

Did anybody hear about it before?

 

[Wrecker4923]

Did anybody hear about it before?

I haven't, but I note that they use filter list(s) that can be added to uBlock origin and others.

 

[Vitali Ortzi]

Just found this one: FMHY SafeGuard – Get this Extension for Firefox (en-US)

Did anybody hear about it before?

Yes it's specific to mark what piracy related links are safe or not according to FMHY list