Symantec Rethinks Firefox vs IE Vulnerabilities

chill writes "Last September security software vendor Symantec issued a report claiming IE had fewer critical flaws than Firefox and thus was more secure. Well, it seem they have now rethought that position. 'How we did it before wasn't a fair comparison,' said Oliver Friedrichs, the senior manager of Symantec's security response group. 'It wasn't an apples to apples comparison.' The key was vendor acknowledged critical vulnerabilities. Thus, if Microsoft (or the Mozilla Foundation) didn't agree it was critical, then it didn't get counted."

Vendor acknowledged?

[DarthChris]

FTFS:

"The key was vendor acknowledged critical vulnerabilities. Thus, if Microsoft (or the Mozilla Foundation) didn't agree it was critical, then it didn't get counted."

Mozilla has Bugzilla to keep track of it's issues, MS is notorious for claiming bugs are in fact features.

Also, IMHO any security issue is 'critical'. Someone once said that MS's 'critical vulnerabilities' are security flaws that should never have made it past design stage [vanwensveen.nl].

Re:OneCare

[sqlrob]

vice versa happened a couple of weeks ago. [zdnet.com]

Re:OneCare

[Dehumanizer]

Almost there.

Joe Sixpack believes all software is from Microsoft. In fact, they invented computers, ya know.

Re:Not too surprising

[nvrrobx]

Microsoft was a strategic partner of Symantec until the day OneCare was released. Note I said was.

Yes, I work for Symantec. Any opinions I express in a post are my own and not necessarily those of my employer.