>http://www.solutions.fi/index.cgi/news_2001_11_09?lang=eng
>it scared me more than the bug itself.

It presents one side of the situation, and then asks you to vote on which company is better. Nice. Then it gets better, they say:

We however think that it is in the best interest of all Internet Explorer users to know that the browser they are using and trusting their business on contains a vulnerability and that their personal and possibly critical information might be compromised by third parties, and that they can actually prevent this from happening by disabling cookies from the browser.

FWIW, I disagree totally. My mom doesn't care about the technical details of the bug. The only people who would care, are the losers that exploit the bugs with viruses and attacks. So in essence, the company that posted the details of the bug did abolutlely nothing, except giving virus writers something to do and putting MS in a tight spot as far as a patch goes. The icing on the cake: they want you to think that MS is irresponisble. These guys are brilliant.

If Online Solutions wanted to avoid a catastrophe by submitting the bug to MS, thats what they would have done. Instead, they assumed they knew how to fix the problem they found and how long it should take then refused to test the fix because they didn't have access to the source code like MS does. They completely ignored every political issue involved here, along with many technical issues, including the deployment of the fix. Finally, and inappropriately, they took matters in to their own hands by creating a scene around this security problem. A big no no.

Between the faulty assumptions, misinformation, grammar/spelling problems, and overall childish behavior, "voting" for the irresponsible company is actually pretty easy. Just my 2 cents.