4 ms·

Looking at this ad makes me wonder what the rules are surrounding unfounded claims in advertising in the US. I know that in Australia several companies have ha

Looking at this ad makes me wonder what the rules are surrounding unfounded claims in advertising in the US. I know that in Australia several companies have had to either stop using parts of their advertising materials or have been taken to court for stating 'facts' or 'statistics' which they simply couldn't provide any evidence for. Could the regulations around this be used to stop M$ from spreading such FUD around? The last thing we want is more IE zombie-users stumbling around the 'net and feeding the botnets. Input appreciated!

aarongough 17y ago
I just submitted this to the Federal Trade Commission complaints system: ----------- On this web-page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/internet-explorer/get-the-facts/browser-comparison.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/windows/internet-explorer/get-the-f... Microsoft repeatedly make unfounded claims about the abilities of it's latest web-browser (Internet Explorer 8). These claims offer no statistical proof to back them up and are completely at odds with the considered opinions of most of the online community and many professional security experts. I personally believe that they are attacking browser providers without a reasonable basis in an effort to retain the custom of un-informed users. Evidence to support my claim is: http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/03/18/pwn2own-2009-day-1---safari-internet-explorer-and-firefox-taken-down-by-four-zero-day-exploits http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/03/18/pwn2own-2009-... "Today's first day of Pwn2Own contest is now officially over [...] Between two winning contestants, they were able to compromise Safari (twice), IE8, and Firefox." Microsoft claim that IE8 is more secure than Chrome and FireFox, yet the very same security community that discovered the IE8 exploit listed above failed to find any exploits in Google Chrome. In a seperate interview one of the winning hackers (Charlie Miller) said: http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 "There are bugs in Chrome but they’re very hard to exploit. [...] The’ve got that sandbox model that’s hard to get out of. With Chrome, it’s a combination of things — you can’t execute on the heap, the OS protections in Windows and the Sandbox." Your attention to this matter is appreciated. ------------ If other people were to submit similar complaints I'm sure it would bring the matter to some attention!

aarongough 17y ago

I just submitted this to the Federal Trade Commission complaints system: ----------- On this web-page: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/internet-explorer/get-the-facts/browser-comparison.aspx http://www.microsoft.com/windows/internet-explorer/get-the-f... Microsoft repeatedly make unfounded claims about the abilities of it's latest web-browser (Internet Explorer 8). These claims offer no statistical proof to back them up and are completely at odds with the considered opinions of most of the online community and many professional security experts. I personally believe that they are attacking browser providers without a reasonable basis in an effort to retain the custom of un-informed users. Evidence to support my claim is: http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/03/18/pwn2own-2009-day-1---safari-internet-explorer-and-firefox-taken-down-by-four-zero-day-exploits http://dvlabs.tippingpoint.com/blog/2009/03/18/pwn2own-2009-... "Today's first day of Pwn2Own contest is now officially over [...] Between two winning contestants, they were able to compromise Safari (twice), IE8, and Firefox." Microsoft claim that IE8 is more secure than Chrome and FireFox, yet the very same security community that discovered the IE8 exploit listed above failed to find any exploits in Google Chrome. In a seperate interview one of the winning hackers (Charlie Miller) said: http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=2941 "There are bugs in Chrome but they’re very hard to exploit. [...] The’ve got that sandbox model that’s hard to get out of. With Chrome, it’s a combination of things — you can’t execute on the heap, the OS protections in Windows and the Sandbox." Your attention to this matter is appreciated. ------------ If other people were to submit similar complaints I'm sure it would bring the matter to some attention!