Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 17:01:39 -0600, Sinister Midget wrote:
>
>> On 2007-12-01, Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlmann@xxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
>>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007 06:45:35 -0800 (PST), Ramon F Herrera wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 1, 10:15 am, Ramon F Herrera <ra...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> "The past year has seen a massive increase in the number of flaws
>>>>>> found in Microsoft software, according to vulnerability-scanning
>>>>>> company Qualys. Between 2006 and 2007, there was an almost threefold
>>>>>> rise in Microsoft flaws, Qualys said on Wednesday."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.news.com/Study-Huge-jump-in-Microsoft-flaws-since-last-yea...http://tinyurl.com/2b6psd
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -RFH
>>>>>
>>>>> "Microsoft declined to comment for this story."
>>>>
>>>> What this doesn't say is that virtually all of those vulnerabilities are
>>>> in
>>>> older versions of the software. The most recent versions (Vista, Office
>>>> 2007, etc..) are most times not susceptible to them.
>>>
>>> Do you actually think anybody is dumb enough to take *your* word for this,
>>> Erik?
>>> I'd rather believe DumbFullShit.
>>
>> Of _course_ he thinks somebody will believe him. He also thinks nobody
>> will look at the target period and compare that to release dates of the
>> stuff he implies is impervious.
>
> So, apparently you've actually done that then. So you can easily provide
> the evidence which contradicts me. Right?
of more concern than Roy's schizo ravings, did you read this?
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2007/11/animal_rights_a.html
This IS something to concern us all.
--
Best if used before date on carton.
|
|
