4 ms·

Here you go https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_FROM%5D=2006&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_TO%5D=2022&arrFilter_pf%5BSEARCH%5D=&arrFilter_

Here you go https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_FROM%5D=2006&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_TO%5D=2022&arrFilter_pf%5BSEARCH%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5BVENDORS%5D%5B%5D=6 https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%...

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
hluska 5y ago
Good citation. :)
rendall 5y ago
100% of all zero-day vulnerabilities from 2008-2022 are due to Adobe? Let's look at the entire context. https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_FROM%5D=2006&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_TO%5D=2022&arrFilter_pf%5BSEARCH%5D= https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%...
- Deukhoofd 5y ago
  No, I was filtering on Adobe so you could easily see all Flash zero days.
- bydo 5y ago
  One in twelve of all security issues—in a period that begins when Flash was already on the decline and extends far beyond when Flash was at all relevant—were caused by a single web browser plugin and you're trying to handwave that off as not a big deal? Adobe has the highest percentage of exploits listed there for any company that is not an OS vendor, and Flash has the most of any single product that is not Windows (in an era when XP was still supported!) or IE (which it ties with). And, yeah, Flash did suck as an end-user experience. For a few years it seemed like every restaurant in existence had an all-Flash web presence, and, no, waiting for endless animations while wading through some entirely non-standard "rich media" experience, while listening to my laptop fans kick into overdrive, did not "surprise and delight" when I was just trying to find their hours and a menu. It was absolutely infuriating. This is ignoring that one of the major malware vectors that wasn't a zero-day at the time was to just put up a webpage claiming that Flash was out of date, and then linking a fake updater. Sure, that wasn't entirely Adobe's fault, but if they'd done a better job of keeping it up to date on their own it would have been an awful lot less believable to end users.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

hluska 5y ago

Good citation. :)

rendall 5y ago

100% of all zero-day vulnerabilities from 2008-2022 are due to Adobe? Let's look at the entire context. https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_FROM%5D=2006&arrFilter_pf%5BYEAR_TO%5D=2022&arrFilter_pf%5BSEARCH%5D= https://www.zero-day.cz/database/?set_filter=Y&arrFilter_pf%...

Deukhoofd 5y ago
No, I was filtering on Adobe so you could easily see all Flash zero days.
bydo 5y ago
One in twelve of all security issues—in a period that begins when Flash was already on the decline and extends far beyond when Flash was at all relevant—were caused by a single web browser plugin and you're trying to handwave that off as not a big deal? Adobe has the highest percentage of exploits listed there for any company that is not an OS vendor, and Flash has the most of any single product that is not Windows (in an era when XP was still supported!) or IE (which it ties with). And, yeah, Flash did suck as an end-user experience. For a few years it seemed like every restaurant in existence had an all-Flash web presence, and, no, waiting for endless animations while wading through some entirely non-standard "rich media" experience, while listening to my laptop fans kick into overdrive, did not "surprise and delight" when I was just trying to find their hours and a menu. It was absolutely infuriating. This is ignoring that one of the major malware vectors that wasn't a zero-day at the time was to just put up a webpage claiming that Flash was out of date, and then linking a fake updater. Sure, that wasn't entirely Adobe's fault, but if they'd done a better job of keeping it up to date on their own it would have been an awful lot less believable to end users.