Vista Security Claims Debunked

An anonymous reader writes "Apparently Microsoft still hasn't learned that counting vendor acknowledged vulnerabilities isn't a good way to establish the security of an OS. As an analysis of Microsoft's claims on Full Disclosure shows, we see that the methodology used was badly flawed. A bug in Firefox (not to mention emacs), counts as a flaw for Linux, while IE bugs get ignored on Vista's chart. Then we see that vulnerabilities aren't vulnerabilities when they're security-challenged features such as Vista's Teredo. Also, there's far too little consideration given to severity, given that it stoops to counting even extra access restrictions on a file in OSX to have something to show. In short, the original Microsoft analysis was good PR and poor research."

Comments

Yo0 insensitive clod.

[Anonymous Coward]

Vio7ated. In the

Vista == Visa

[guisar]

It's produced in China using toxic chemicals. The shareholders of MSFT all drive SUVs and wack Bald Eagles as they motor down Pennsylvania Avenue. How about considering how we might turn this on it's head and generating some effective retribution through mainstream channels. Yeah, we're all convinced on Slashdot but how about convincing all the readers of Time or Myspace.

MOD UP WUT

[Vexorian]

Mod parent UP!, then mod grandparent DOWN! and then Give me the -1 off-topic this post deserves.