If only you worried about this stuff when you link roughlydrafted... On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Tom Piwowar <[email protected]> wrote:
> >"A report by Secunia finds the vulnerabilities in Mozilla Firefox greatly > >outnumbered those in Internet Explorer, Apple Safari and other browsers in > >2008" > > 1) How did Secunia count vulnerabilities? > > The report does not say. The thrust of the "Letter from the CEO" is that > Secunia wants to expand its market to non-Microsoft shops. This "report" > is from their marketing department, not a research department. > > 2) How did the reporter report on the Secunia report? > > The reporter could have mentioned other interesting items from the > report, but chose not to. For example Secunia counted 9 "zero-day" > vulnerabilities for IE and 3 for everybody else. They also counted 366 > Active-X vulnerabilities and just 1 for FireFox plug-ins. > > The report is very short. I wonder why the reporter chose to provide such > a narrow picture. Does eWeek have a bandwidth problem and is telling > reporters to keep their stories short? Probably not. If I had the time I > would look at other stories by this reporter to look for bias. > > The 366 Active-X vulnerabilities in 2008 certainly caught my eye. They is > way worse than any other product in the report. > > > ************************************************************************* > ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** > ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** > ************************************************************************* > ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
