Tracy;

Some things that bother me about this "report":

1. When was this “report” created?
2. Time line comparison of IE 6 and Firefox 1.0 for example:
a. IE 6 2003-2005
b. FireFox 2003-2005 released in November 2004 with reporting from December and January (which still has a few days left in the month I noticed).

The verbiage also bothers me.

Secunia released advisories for IE 6.0 = 60 during the period of interest. The period is stated as 2003-2004 if you place your cursor over the parenthetical expression (Based upon 60 advisories from 2003 - 2005)

Secunia released advisories for FireFox = 6 during the period of interest with the same inconsistent date range.

I find the report to be of no professional value and consider it to be poorly created. With a background in Science and Engineering I would never accept a report of this nature. The sample period is too short for FireFox to draw any conclusions.

Who proof read the report? I like the sentence, "Secunia's unique corporate culture has been the driving force behind these services and the success". The success of what? We have the definite article with no subject!

Oh well, not everyone cares for accuracy or meaning. It is all about profit! :)


Tom

P.S. For kicks cionsider if you will:

IE 6 60 Advisories in 24 months = 2.5/month.

Firefox 1.0 6 Advisories for two months reported = 3.0/month. :)





>This is interesting:
>
>http://www.myscacc.org/browser_vulnerabilities.htm