As noted in the previous discussion of this, it is, IMO not unfair to call this a PR hit piece. The authors are competing with the official APT repositories, an

As noted in the previous discussion of this, it is, IMO not unfair to call this a PR hit piece. The authors are competing with the official APT repositories, and instead of informing users to patch, like a usual vulnerability announcement, it is instead in their business interest to drive as many clicks as possible and exaggerate the vulnerabilities. Regardless of the partially valid issues raised, it was apparent from the reading it that marketing their services was the prime goal of this article, so I rejected and still reject this article out of principle (and have felt extremely reluctant to use their services ever since).