G+_Eddie Foy Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 Time to rethink that false sense of security http://tinyurl.com/zdc3vtr http://tinyurl.com/zdc3vtr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Ben Reese Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 Numbers could be misleading too... Disclosed vulnerabilities may not mean the software is insecure, but that there's more research for those products. And the purpose of the software and severity of the vulnerability are far more important than the number of disclosures. For example, the 29 Oracle DBMS problems could be a much larger issue than the 178 Firefox issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_John Phillips Posted January 1, 2016 Share Posted January 1, 2016 It just goes to show that you can prove anything with statistics, if you read the article through to the end it's fairly self explanatory that the figures are wrongly displayed, if you add up all of the windows vulnerability sit puts them at the top of the list by far. I do wonder who the sponsor of this news agency is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Ben Reese Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 I thought the article also pointed out though that many of the Windows vulnerabilities may have spanned multiple versions of Windows. Like, a library was updated that's used in 10, 8.1, and 7; so it was counted for each OS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts