Hey, I entirely get where you're coming from. But I'd suggest it's kind of a security by obscurity blanket (I know that's a horrendous aphorism - forgive me, p

Hey, I entirely get where you're coming from. But I'd suggest it's kind of a security by obscurity blanket (I know that's a horrendous aphorism - forgive me, please). I think the problem I have lies here: > As soon as a hacking technique becomes public, > every script kiddie will get their hand on it, At the time Google announced it we had no idea how many script kiddies (or worse) had their hands on it. Certainly it was known the number was > 0. So the question instantly becomes - is it safe to assume only relatively benign bad people know about, and are using, and other people (eg. swarms of script kiddies) don't know about it and won't for some weeks? I'm empathetic to people whose day job is not IT, and are stuck for various reasons using poorly maintained Microsoft software, but I genuinely do not believe we are all safer by assuming (hoping?) active exploits are minimally used. Anyway, Microsoft was well aware of Google's policy on announcements for actively exploited vulnerabilities, and didn't even choose to provide some mitigation advice prior to their (presumably upcoming) security patch.