I do take issue with this fluffy statement at the top: > If the reader finds the mistakes in the design, this proves that Microsoft has weak developers. (The

I do take issue with this fluffy statement at the top: > If the reader finds the mistakes in the design, this proves that Microsoft has weak developers. (The article even goes on later to say basically "don't attribute all of these to stupid engineers", and the explicit 17 mistakes are almost entirely not related to the technical content of the security breakages, so there's a sleight of hand being performed here already between "mistakes in the design" and "mistakes in organisational software engineering practice"!) While I have no love of Microsoft software, and clearly the Xbox was woefully insecure, the statement ignores the fact that knowing there is something to find is often enough to find it. I am failing to find the definitive article about this, but there's something about this by Michael Nielsen or Andy Matuschak or similar. One of its examples is a quote by Kasparov or Magnus Carlsen or similar, to the effect that the single word "now" at the right time would be enough to win a game, because it would announce that there was a discovery to be found. This article is entitled "17 Mistakes…", and it also presents the relevant details of the design rather than all the details of the design, so the problem of finding the mistakes given the description is much, much easier than the problem of reviewing a complete design spec.