Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
Justin, your answers are always helpful, constructive and
non-confrontational : please accept my replies (below) in the same
vein --
Justin Wood (Callek) wrote:
... SeaMonkey 2.0.14 is VULNERABLE to web attacks/exploits,
including ones actively being exploited as we speak.
I did not suggest otherwise. But it was just as vulnerable on the
day that it was released, and to suggest otherwise is grossly
irresponsible.
Speaking of hyperbole... ;-)
SM 2.0.14, like any software product, was safest on the day it was
released. As time passes, the bad guys continue to develop new exploits,
and both good guys and bad guys discover holes they didn't know about on
day one. The equal vulnerability of which you speak is a theoretical
abstraction; what matters is practical reality. A samurai was exactly as
skillful and dangerous the day before firearms were introduced into
Japan as he was the day afterward, but he suddenly became vulnerable to
their attack, and the emperor could no longer rely on him for
protection. With no deterioration of his skills whatsoever, he became
grossly inferior to the state of the art.
--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
