>Microsoft also said open-source software is inherently less secure
>because the code is available for the world to examine for flaws,
>making it possible for hackers or criminals to exploit
>them. Proprietary software, the company argued, is more secure because
>of its closed nature.
Presumably the contrast between this and their other recent declaration
(that their code is so insecure releasing it would be a national
security risk) doesn't occur to them? Or maybe they think the two
compliment each other (eg "look, our code is so insecure that we can't
release it, and we can't believe anyone is any better than us, so theirs
must be so insecure it can't be released too")
