i see two odd points here:

- it's utterly unbelievable that a company asks to be paid to make secure the crappy software it sells; instead, users should be compensated whenever are hit by incidents caused by micro$oft neglect, ignorance or simply hopelessly wrong design;

- micro$oft is hardly in the position to recommend its services to provide anything secure. it has a long standing reputation for designing and developing sub-optimal (hey... calling it this way is really generous...) crapware.

would you trust them?

[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/newsbriefs/132/549#549