Netscape Releases Security Update

daria42 writes "Less than 24 hours after releasing Netscape 8, Netscape has released a security patch bringing the browser up to version 8.0.1. The patch address security vulnerabilities in version 1.0.3 of the Firefox code on which Netscape is based. The update comes amid online criticism from Firefox developers that the browser was insecure."

Comments

software and bridges

[Virtual Karma]

Don't you think it is wiser to wait 24 hours longer (or maybe a week or so) and then release a quality product rather than issue patches. Imagine if civil engineers started doing the same with buildings and bridges.

Why didn't they wait?

[drsmack1]

I did not understand why it was based on 1.03 anyway; were they completely unaware of what was going on at the firefox project?

Re:Why didn't they wait?

[Reducer2001]

What were they supposed to do? They have to do a code-freeze sometime. If they would have waited until 1.0.4 was out, then we would all be screaming that they should have waited until 1.0.5 was out. You know that another security bug will be found in Firefox again. They can't just keep holding off releasing a product because of security exploits that haven't been discovered yet.

I don't get it.

[Nytewynd]

What is the deal with Netscape 8? It sounds like they basically downloaded the source code for Firefox, recompiled it, and then distributed it as something new.

First, why isn't Firefox going after Netscape and second, why would anyone start using Netscape when Firefox knows their own code better and fixes it faster?

I think I might get the Firefox code myself and create a browser called LOL-I'm-Really-Just-Firefox. It will be huge.

Re:Browser boys are back

[Soybean47]

Are the browser wars really back? Has anyone tried the new Netscape? Given that they pretty much peaked around 4.7 or something like that, or earlier depending on who you ask, I just don't see any reason to even try it. What is Netscape likely to give me that Firefox can't?

Re:Netscape's Original 8.0 Release

[aliebrah]

The reason they released it was it was all they had. They didn't have time to test and integrate a new version. It's the firefox people's fault for having the vulnerabilities, I think they're just trying to distract from their own failings.

This is frankly a load of bollocks. If Netscape is going to harp about their commitment to security, then holding off release to include the fixes from Firefox 1.0.4 would have been the only right thing to do.

Sure, the problems existed in Firefox itself, but Netscape has chosen to (a) base it's products on Firefox, and (b) tout security as a primary feature. Nobody has forced them to do it, least of all the Mozilla Foundation.

What you're seeing Firefox devs say has nothing to do with a smokescreen. It's simply an observation that Netscape, the company who offers "more security choices" than anyone else chose to release a product with known critical vulnerabilities instead of waiting a single day to patch them. As they've demonstrated, it only did take them that long.

Rather embarassing

[Phil246]

Regardless of the reasons why - For a software company to release a patch for a product they released 24 hours ago is , to say the least embarassing.
I would imagine there are quite a few red faces around netscape today

gross misuse of the term

[gosand]

Imagine if civil engineers started doing the same with buildings and bridges.

Imagine if software developers were held to the same standards as engineers.

I get tired people comparing software development to real engineering when developers refuse to follow the same rigorous standards that engineering disciplines have to follow. There are some software engineers out there, but most of the people with that title are simply software developers. Not that every piece of software needs to be engineered, but way too many "software engineers" have no business using the word engineer when they refuse to follow any type of rigorous process around software development.

Again - most software doesn't need to be engineered, but some does. The term "software engineer" is grossly misued most of the time.