|
Posted by Andreas Kohlbach on May 30, 2007, 5:51 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Payton Byrd wrote on 30. May 2007:
>
ewsreaders_show_this_in_the_body.87r6ozp5cg.fsf@usenet.ankman.de...
>>PC Guy wrote on 29. May 2007:
>>>
>>>
>>>
t.ankman.de...
>>
>>And it seems that MS only *does* something for security if it hurts
>>otherwise. Apache gained market share after the IIS 5 impact so MS had to
>>do something.
>
> IIS never had a majority share of webservers, so the argument doesn't hol=
d that it only does something when they loose market share. Even when IIS4=
and IIS5 were getting pwned, they were still gaining share against Netscap=
e and Apache.
For my knowledge Apache already lead the market shares when the IIS was
impacted by "Code Red".
>>While Windows and the Internet Explorer still lead the market, why should
>>MS bother? If Firefox and Linux would gain share MS would also improve
>>security of Windows and the IE. But now there's no need to.
>
> Do you know of any critical exploits of IE 7? IE 7 has been out since Oc=
tober of last year and in beta for 2 years before that.=20=20=20
IE lead the market since about 1998 and was the software which triggered
the most exploits. And they were not fixed in a timely manner back then
(are they now, or are there still critical bugs unfixed?). Now Mozilla
gains share and MS has to take very good care of security not to lose
more customers using IE.
X'post + F'up2 comp.security.misc.
=2D-=20
Andreas
My Commodore 64 classic game music page at
http://freenet-homepage.de/ankman/sid.html
| 
XML site map