Don't forget that Microsoft EULA especially states that in no case and in no way Microsoft can be held responsible - any attempts will simply face a nice wall of lawyers. Lot's of them... Truth is that actually open source software legally are better supported (ok, I will have to doublecheck this), since when we were checking some licenses - M$ windows vs GPL, Apache vs IIS, open source products at least claimed that the products should work. M$ just said - piss off and be on your own.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kristian Hermansen Sent: ceturtdiena, 2003. gada 11. decembri 7:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Full-Disclosure] Re: Internet Explorer URL parsing vulnerability Shouldn't M$ be held responsible dude? The guy who discovered the flaw didn't produce the bad code, M$ did. If anything, M$ should be sued for rushing the product to market. And let the flames begin as this topic has been discussed all too many times before. If you don't like the idea of "FULL DISCLOSURE", then why are you on this mailing list? Kristian Hermansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- ... _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
