by sponge » Feb 16, 2005 @ 5:39am
You claim that FF will get exploited more as it gets used more. I'm bringing up IIS vs Apache because MARKET SHARE DOES NOT DICTATE HOW MANY EXPLOITS GET RELEASED. Claiming FireFox will have more exploits once it gets used more is NOT CORRECT.
In handy table form, since this seems to be far above your head:
Point: "The more Firefox get used, the more vulnerabilities will show up."
Counter-Point: Apache is used more, yet it is not exploited more.
That's all. Simply drawing a parallel from a case where the most popular is NOT the most exploited. Last time I checked, that's perfectly valid logic.
But yet you decide to quote one completly irrelevant, minor line, and avoid the actual facts as you normally do, to resort to name calling and yelling OMG UYO HATE MS HIPPIE.
Then again, I really should've learned by now not to expect you to talk about the points and instead sink down another level. Why I'm bothering writing this is beyond me, since you'll take something else out of context and start aimlessly lambasting that.
The naive one is the one that won't look at solid, trusted, numbers, instead of falling back onto whipping out his experience e-penis. You must think of DNS is some sort of magic wizardry if Netcraft is heresy. Still waiting for some proof, but feel free to pussyfoot around for another few pages, and blatanly ignore what's been put in front of you. You seem to have fun with that.
Firefox is not getting by with security through obscurity. Firefox will not neccecarily suffer from the epidemic of IE holes if it were to become #1.
That is my point, so when you decide to twist my words again, everyone here who has some normal logic can read the above.
--
Mike: IIS 6 is much better, however it's still had more than it's share of problems. From personal experience, I wouldn't be afraid of putting an IIS6 server out there, hell it even works in a pinch on my Win2003 home computer.
holy internets batman.
.
