Re: MS lying again about IE security

[Sermo Malifer <sermomalifer@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> After takin' a swig o' grog, Sermo Malifer belched out
>   this bit o' wisdom:
>
> > Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> > > ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Friday 30 January 2009 13:35 : \____
> > >
> > > > Microsofts Security Evangelist Jeff Jones was caught providing doctored
> > > > statistics about IE and Firefox, claiming IE was *better*
> > > >
> > > > Here is the breakdown of what really is the issue
> > > http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2009/01/blogfight_the_truth_about_ie_v.html
> > >
> > > Jeff Jones is a dunce < http://boycottnovell.com/2007/12/03/firefox-fud-latest/
> > > > whose output needs to be embargoed.
> > > He knows he's lying, but he's paid to do that.
> > >
> > > His class has the parity of Exxon-funded global warning deniers.
> > "In contrast, Jones appears to arrive at 285 days of vulnerability for 
> > Firefox by focusing exclusively on flaws that were considered by Mozilla 
> > and other security experts to be far less severe."
> > I don't see any outright lying here, just a difference of opinion.
> Huh?  It's simple /counting/.
No, it's not that simple.

> 98 days.  9 days.
>
> Active exploits.  No active exploits.
The blog wasn't about active exploits.   I suggest you reread it.