Except that *none* of the vulnerabilities in FireFox are rated "high" or "extreme" whereas in IE not only were there more vulnerabilites in absolute terms (10 times as many advisories - 60 compared to 6!) but fully 40% of them were rated "high" or "extreme".

Update: I just read Tom's reply and indeed comparing data for different reporting periods would be unfair and inconsistent. I assumed the periods were the same.

One could also argue that IE is the more often targetted browser and hence more insecurities have been found while the others, being less targetted, may have vulnerabilites not yet discovered. Time will tell. But I must agree with Tom on the reporting period controversy.



>Exactly, that is my point, but I left it open to the viewer to determine their own requirements and preferences based on the numbers. Personally my big concern was not the number of vulnerabilities found, but the percentage of vulnerabilities found that were left unpatched. While Firefox had fewer vulnerabilities found, 83% of those vulnerabilities were left unpatched and Internet Explorer patched all but 33%.
>
>
>
>>I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. Fewer vulnerabilities found does not equate to more secure.
>>
>>>This is interesting:
>>>
>>>http://www.myscacc.org/browser_vulnerabilities.htm