<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://blogs.technet.com/utility/FeedStylesheets/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>USA Today writes an article about FF 3.0 - hilarity ensues . . . </title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx</link><description>http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/computersecurity/2008-06-17-mozilla-window-snyder_N.htm Boy why bother with facts when it's so easy to make stuff up and to throw out randomly generated numbers like these: " Organized cybercrime gangs are more highly</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>CommunityServer 2.1 SP1 (Build: 61025.2)</generator><item><title>re: USA Today writes an article about FF 3.0 - hilarity ensues . . . </title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3073698</link><pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:06:42 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3073698</guid><dc:creator>blotj</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;and open source vs closed source has how much to do with this? How many CVEs in the first two weeks do you think IE would have if the source became public?&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>re: USA Today writes an article about FF 3.0 - hilarity ensues . . . </title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3074034</link><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 04:23:21 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3074034</guid><dc:creator>kuza55</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Maybe it's just me, but I'm not going to say browser security is good enough until the CVE count drops to zero, and even then bugs patches aren't a good metric, etc, etc.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Having said that; props on protected mode on Vista. Though this doesn't mean that having exploitable vulns is ok. And there's also clearly still room for improvement with it, and the fact that you say _most_ rather than all still leaves me a bit uneasy (even though I'm assuming this is just to write to the cache), and I would personally prefer it if IE couldn't read from most of the disk either, but it's a step in the right direction (being a web guy; if I can get you to perform actions on your bank site with your credentials, etc, etc, it's still bad).&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>The IE versus FF security track record</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3074041</link><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 04:33:48 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3074041</guid><dc:creator>Rod Trent at myITforum.com</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;Robert Hensing posts an interesting piece on his blog, with a take on a recent USAToday article. http&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>Don’t Feed or Tease the Bears…</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3074098</link><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:20:43 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3074098</guid><dc:creator>David LeBlanc's Web Log</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I've learned over the years to avoid bragging about how much more secure something is than something&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>(Nie)bezpieczny Firefox 3</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3074608</link><pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:07:45 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3074608</guid><dc:creator>Wampiryczny blog</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;We wtorek swoją premierę miał Firefox 3. W jednej wypowiedzi Window Snyder powiedziała: In setting out to elevate Firefox's basic security, Snyder is also compelling Microsoft and Apple, maker of the Safari browser, to follow her lead — or get ou&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item><item><title>Yet Another Pro-Vista Argument:  IE7 on Vista has Fewer Vulnerabilities than Even Firefox</title><link>http://blogs.technet.com/robert_hensing/archive/2008/06/18/usa-today-writes-an-article-about-ff-3-0-hilarity-ensues.aspx#3075084</link><pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:45:43 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">d5e57398-b9ef-4490-9955-07cbb4e4a80d:3075084</guid><dc:creator>Realtime Community | Windows Server</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;In the same MyITForum.com newsletter where I got this other tantalizing piece of IE info, I also read a pass-through post where Robert Hensing deconstructs some misinformation posted by the USA Today. Specifically, he finds that in reading through the&lt;/p&gt;
</description></item></channel></rss>