Im not sure theres a single person out there who has an understanding of the entire firefox codebase. What you propose is a practical impossibility.
I guess we're going with "misinformed".
PDF, flash, and java are all cross-platform runtimes. When a bug is patched in one, its patched in all of them-- check the java update history, and see how every windows update has a corresponding linux update. Then check and see just how much of each update is "critical security fixes". IIRC, its "most of them".
If firefox or safari have exploitable bugs (they do), those bugs tend to exist on multiple platforms. Blaming the OS for a framework that interprets code off of the internet-- and is exploited doing so-- is just silly.
Why are there no botnets of Mac or Linux machines?
Because Linux and OSX comprise like 5% of the market, collectively. If youre writing an exploit-kit, would you target windows (~95%), or OSX (5%)? Kind of proved that point with Pwn2Own, where OSX was fully compromised by simply sending a user to a link, before the windows computer, every year for 5 years, simply because of the financial incentive (free MacBook).
Also, your info is wrong. Linux boxes get exploited / broken into all the time; its just that (again) the desktop market for Linux is absolutely miniscule. OSX exploits have actually been on the rise over the last few years as its market share picks up.
As for Pwn2Own, the results really are meaningless - if you break OS X, you win a MacBook. If you break Windows, you get a Sony laptop. If you break Linux, you get a Dell. And they aren't necessarily the nicest machines on the lineup, either.
Theyre not meaningless. They prove exactly what people have been saying for years: that if theres a financial incentive, a platform will be exploited. When the incentive is a macbook, oh look OSX gets exploited in less than a day.
Not sure if youre aware, but theres an entire book of the bible dedicated to how sex is a beautiful thing.
Still strawmen are always fun i guess.
Sigh. The asshole would be fetid, and the cock would be rancid.
Then dont give your research to Elsevier. Im not seeing the dilemma here.
As with fiction, publishers take a financial risk on your work, and hence demanding exclusivity in contracts is reasonable.
Not sure if you guys are trolling or just misinformed. Windows bugs have long since ceased to be the exploit mechanism for viruses; last time I saw a breakdown on it (a year or so ago) it was something like 35% java holes, 25% adobe acrobat holes, 20% adobe flash holes, 10% browser holes, and a small percentage of OS vulnearabilities.
Additionally, since Vista, Windows' "security" has generally been as good or better than its competitors; it had strong ASLR before OSX / Linux, for starters. The issue is that none of that stuff protects against A) buggy plugins, or B) user-executed viruses (aka trojans). The other big issue is that theres been a ton of misinformation on the issue, particularly by Apple's marketing; Im really not clear why anyone would take advertising at face value, or assume that it is technically accurate. Didnt Apple fall FIRST in the first 5-6 Pwn2Own competitions?
On my mobile device, half the text is under the X-rays, looking like some bizarre part of it.
Needlessly using some complicated HTML generator that tries to control layout down to the atom FTL.
Maybe to start them up. But try anyhing significant with thousands of cells, formulae, and VB code, all of which is script on top of script, and RAM skyrockets and speed slows.
Having said that, VB is pretty fast as script goes. Some cleve people have optimized it internally pretty well.
How a datacenter encrypts its data is never going to be something the average user can vet, ever. No user should even have access to that data, which is why it wasnt encrypted to begin with: You need to have some pretty solid connections to manage getting access to that stuff.
Theres also no way to vet whether the keys are being provided to a third party, whether or not the backend software is FOSS or not. If Red Hat made the same announcement, there would be no reason the same "objection" couldnt apply.
Must be in a jail when I use firefox, too, since i have no way to inspect that source code and have an understanding of it either (Im not a trained software dev qualified to analyze several million lines of code).
Yes, all non-programmers are in a jail, at all times.