Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't
Jon Lasser, 2002-10-09

Developers are accused of not publicizing the browser's security vulnerabilities enough. But do we really need world wide alerts for every bug?

Expand all | Post comment

Cool a unix/lenix guy preaching the same stuff as M$crud 2002-10-09
Twinker (3 replies)

I dissagree with you for the same reasons I dissagree w/Bill. The two of you seem to feel that having failed to provide a secure package, the failures should remain hidden till you get around to fixing it. Leaving the users and networks open to damage. So what it is minor in YOUR eyes.

I would rather KNOW about the trival problems and have a chance to do somthing, (pull my internet connection if I have to) than have some "white knight" save me from the "usless" information that can only cause me to "panic". I would "have" to do the research on the possible bug. But guess what - that is what they pay me for.

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/114/16751#16751

Cool a unix/lenix guy preaching the same stuff as M$crud 2002-10-09
Rob John <rdrj@mindspring.com> (2 replies)

Cool a unix/lenix guy preaching the same stuff as M$crud 2002-10-10
JTM

My point was.... 2002-10-10
Twinker (1 replies)

Nothing's hidden 2002-10-15
Anonymous (1 replies)

Nothing's hidden 2002-10-15
Karl

Cool a unix/lenix guy preaching the same stuff as M$crud 2002-10-15
Jason

Cool a unix/lenix guy preaching the same stuff as M$crud 2002-10-16
DaveHowe

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't 2002-10-09
Chad Loder

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't 2002-10-10
Jon Lasser (2 replies)

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't 2002-10-11
Sam

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't 2002-10-16
Serge Wroclawski

Mozilla's 'Code of Silence' Isn't 2002-10-10
Anonymous