I will rephase for a more precisely question. If I click on a malicious/virus link, then I do not click on anything further or download anything from that website, can my PC get hacked?
I am asking this question on the perspective of a web developer through all the tools and programming languages.
If browsers work as intended, there shouldn't be, but there's always the risk that someone has exploited a vulnerability in a web browser that has gone undetected or unreported. Such vulnerabilities do occur, though most get fixed quickly.
It's highly unlikely that you'd just stumble upon such an exploit, but it's always best to be safe. If you don't know or trust the link, it's best to just not click it.
There is nothing standard that would allow a developer to hack or infect a client computer through a browser simply by the client loading the page.
I want to add a button to my visual C++ form that will open with a specific browser. So far for links I've been using:
System::Diagnostics::Process::Start("UrlHere")
Which, as standard, opens with whatever your default browser is.
I'm wondering what the process would be to force the URL to open with a specific browser and if it's possible without the use of ShellExecute?
Edit - You are correct, this is C++/CLI. Removed the C++ Tag.
Edit Edit - Apologies if it came across as misleading. Some slight elaboration;
The buttons will launch to application URL's, some of which can only be used in Internet Explorer, others that CAN (and should) be used in Chrome. This is why I need to avoid using the default browser and have different buttons using different browsers when launching URLs
Before answering the 'how', I'd like to ask the question "should you be implementing this?"
By not launching the user's default browser, you are subverting the user's decision.
Perhaps the user prefers a particular interface, and is willing to live with the incorrect renderings that come with it.
Perhaps the user has a browser addon that they really need, such as a screen reader for the blind.
You are requiring additional software installed that the user may or may not want.
Perhaps the user doesn't want Chrome. Perhaps the user prefers FireFox.
You are saying that you know which browser is best, now and forever.
What if the next version of IE makes it work with the sites that are currently Chrome-only? What if the next version of Chrome fixes the sites that are currently IE-only?
What if the site changes so that it works in more browsers?
Do you go back and release a new version of your software that changes the browser for particular sites?
You're trying to solve a problem that may already be fixed.
Both Chrome and Firefox support a addon that will render a tab using the IE engine. It can be set to automatically activate when certain URLs are seen.
Perhaps there is a browser that already works with all your sites, that you don't know about.
Therefore, my recommendation is no, do not do this. The user has decided which browser they want to use, respect that decision and use the default browser.
That said, here's how you would do it: You could use the CreateProcess method, but you're in managed-land, so you might as well use it. Use the Process class to launch the new process for you.
Process^ browserProcess = gcnew Process();
browserProcess->StartInfo->UseShellExecute = false;
browserProcess->StartInfo->FileName = "C:\\Program Files (x86)\\Internet Explorer\\iexplore.exe";
browserProcess->StartInfo->Arguments = "http://www.google.com";
browserProcess->Start();
So if you are any sort of clg fan, you'll occasionally visit azubu.tv to watch them. If you go into the chat, using chrome, you can't change your text color. The reason is in line 689 of the chat js. (it's best to pop it out since it's in an iframe). There is an extra = in the comparison that works in firefox but not chrome.
I did not code this site. However, is there anyway to use a chrome plugin to permafix that function? I've already sent out a code update request to the admin -- a month ago. I've been just opening up the javascript console to do it manually but I'd like to help others.
I isn't expected people to develop extensions (or plugins) to fix web pages' .js, because it would take a lot of effort in reverse engineering and development, and the extension will become obsolete as soon the server administrator fixes his own js.
Extensions can do it, but are a very odd way to do that.
I don't know who voted you down without a comment; it's not the way we used to do it here.
I was thinking to add meta tag always in all the websites.
That will trigger google chorme frame to load for users who already installed. I can see the benefits but is there any concerns or facts that I should know before I do that?
Testing in google chrome is enough or testing in google chrome frame explicitly required?
Thanks
Note: please do not mention current know problems "print" and "download" issue. I'm sure those will get fixed soon :)
The only argument against chrome frame that I have seen so far is Microsoft's - "Google Chrome Frame running as a plugin has doubled the attach area for malware and malicious scripts."
Also, you may run into problems with frames. If you have chrome frame on your page and someone has that page iframed on their site you may run into some problems. More info:
http://groups.google.com/group/google-chrome-frame/browse_thread/thread/d5ffe442658bc60e/e6d7a4c1c179c931?lnk=gst&q=iframe
You should only need to test in Chrome Frame for (X)HTML, CSS, and JavaScript...basic stuff. If you are using AJAX (while trying not to break the back button), worried about caching, cookies (accessed via javascript), or other potentially browser-specific browser interactions I suggest testing on the IE+CF platform...at least until the CF team announces 100% interoperability between CF and IE.
Check out the CF Google group for more issues.
Are there any concerns or facts you should know? Yes: Not everyone has Google Chrome Frame installed.
You are adding a new user agent that you will need to test and debug against, without removing the need to test and debug the user experience for other browsers (notably plain IE by itself).
If you don't make the IE user experience equivalent to the Google Chrome experience, then you are alienating a significant percentage of users. Depending on your website and its expected users, the impact of this may range from undesirable to unacceptable. If you do make the user experience equivalent, then there is no point in adding the meta tag.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Can anyone suggest some good browser add-on tools/extensions to help with development?
I have firebug installed in Firefox which is great for dealing with CSS, HTML and javascript; any other suggestions?
Firebug
For Firefox:
Firebug is awesome for investigation and development.
Web Developer Toolbar is good also. Really helps with CSS and page layout stuff as well as much more.
I also use Live HTTP Headers (I think it is called, but it is on my work machine, so can't find the link now). Which has helped us out with caching issues and the like.
I do a lot of mobile phone development, so I also use UserAgent Switcher. Very helpful for pretending to be different mobile phones.
I tend to only use Firefox for development, and just test in other browsers as most do not have the extensive range of plugins to aid development that Firefox does.
Firefox:
Inspect This if you use the DOM Inspector at all
Measure It for telling you pixel distances (if you need that)
IE View or Safari View for ease of testing in other browsers
HTML Validator if you care about validation
Console2 to improve your js error console
The Javascript Shell bookmarklet is also handy (and look at the others there as well)
Edit: This is in addition to the Web Development Toolbar mentioned by others
The other must-have for Firefox is Chris Pederick's Web Developer Toolbar.
You should definitely install Safari. It has a number of tools built-in. I use it in combination with other browsers all the time.
Network Timeline
Error Console
Web Inspector
Snippet Editor
Plus it lets you set the user agent for your requests.
Consider this, it has a separate top-level menu called Develop.
Opera has:
Dragonfly (tools -> advanced -> developer tools)
Debug Menu
UserJS methods for intercepting things
opera:config#CompatMode%20Override for forcing quirks or standards mode
Web developer widgets
You can view source of files, edit them, apply changes and reload from cache.
In case of IE, next tools can be useful
Microsoft Developer Toolbar - dom|styles viewer
Fiddler HTTP Debugger - http monitor
Instant source - dom|styles viewer
Companion.JS - dom|styles viewer, extended error console
The "uber" extension for IE - "Developer Tools", provided as a part of IE8
Developer Console and DOM Snapshot for Opera:
http://dev.opera.com/tools/
Awesomeness is that these are bookmarklets implemented with JS. Suckiness is that they require the Internetz.
Firefox:
Inspect This if you use the DOM Inspector at all
Measure It for telling you pixel distances (if you need that)
IE View or Safari View for ease of testing in other browsers
HTML Validator if you care about validation
Console2 to improve your js error console
The Javascript Shell bookmarklet is also handy (and look at the others there as well)
This is in addition to the Web Development Toolbar mentioned by others
This list by Cebjyre is nearly complete (since FireBug was already mentioned in the question). I would only add Tamperdata. From time to time it is very useful.
Here's my development oriented add-ons for Firefox 3:
Web Developer
Firebug
Firecookie
FirePHP
Rainbow
TamperData
Poster
FireFTP
ReloadEvery
Selenium IDE
YSlow is a sweet Firebug addon for troubleshooting a page's load time.
Other than the excellent tools already mentioned, I find Charles to be extremely useful. Especially since I do alot of work with Flash Remoting which it handles excellently.
Charles is an HTTP proxy / HTTP monitor / Reverse Proxy that enables a developer to view all of the HTTP traffic between their machine and the Internet. This includes requests, responses and the HTTP headers (which contain the cookies and caching information).
Charles can act as a man-in-the-middle for HTTP/SSL communication, enabling you to debug the content of your HTTPS sessions.
It's crossplatform, costs $50, but there's a "30 minute per session"-evaluation you can download.
Here's what I use:
Firefox:
DOM Inspector: I use this more than anything else for web development
Launchy: for opening sites in other browsers/apps
Tamper Data: this can be helpful for debugging GET/POST requests
Web Developer Toolbar: this has so many handy features for debugging: the W3C validation tools, built-in ruler, resizing tools, source manipulation, easy cache/css/script tools
IE:
Internet Explorer Developer Toolbar: nowhere near as handy as the Firefox one, but at least it gives you a decent DOM Inspector
Misc:
Jesse's handy bookmarklets: the shell bookmarklet is especially handy
I also install Safari and Opera, but mostly just use them for testing and benchmarking since their dev tools aren't as robust as Firefox, and they aren't as buggy as IE.
Lynx: I use this to make sure that any JS-heavy sites still work so that I'm sure they'll look OK to google, screen readers, and any other bot-like app.