Bitch Please hfawk:

http://secunia.com/product/11/


http://secunia.com/product/4227/


19 > 3

 

to title topic, yes h:

 

are you on myspace anymore? i don't recall seeing your name listed anymore.

 

can you verify the article's numbers? until you can, :bs:

these are statistics from Secunia, one of the biggest names in computing security. secunia's figures don't line up with the quote you posted (22 total security advisories for firefox from 2003-2005, 69 for IE from 2003-2005). where is that article getting 40 vulnerabilities for firefox?

IE security statistics
Firefox security statistics

scroll down each list and look at the number of vulnerabilities that are left unpatched (the ones that aren't green, with a green check mark). unpatched = still vulnerable. which one is currently less secure?

look at the severity (criticality) percentages of each browser. mozilla has had zero "Extremely critical" vulnerabilities. 14% of IE's vulnerabilities have been deemed "Extremely critical"

then look at the impact graphs. "System access" being the most serious bug (since it allows attackers total access to your computer), 31% of IE's vulnerabilities fall under this category. firefox, 18%.

which one is less secure, and where that article's evidence?

 

here we go again

 

:blah:

the point being, now that firefox has gotten some exposure, and has become a target, the vulnerabilities and exploits have started popping up in force, just like a few of us on this board predicted. i.e. you're all suckers for believing the hype. :fawk:

 

shut up..for god's sake it's only an internet browser!!!! i could write one up and it would never have hacker problems. CHRIST!

 

that doesnt mean that Mozila isn't fixing these vulnerabilities and exploits by force too h:

 

and that point is substantiated by, what, unverifiable and seemingly false claims made by some random internet journalist? or by the fact that FF has far fewer open security vulnerabilities? :chuckles:

 

I've seen this speculation hashed out several times on other message boards and news articles already.

All claims so far have been false. Simply a way to drum up some news sites hits with buzzwords and hearsay. So unless this is some kind of new fangled fancy outer space test you've had implanted into your ass by probing aliens. IT'S FUCKING FALSE. WRONG. SIMPLY NOT RIGHT.

They also fail to take into account the severity of the 'vulnerabilities'. Just because one has a higher number of 'vulnerabilities' doesn't mean shit. It's the severity of those that matters more. Which, if you look, IE has more high and medium level 'vulnerabilities'.

janiVI has pasted in plain text proof that your info is wrong. Would you like more proof?