> Except for the CORS issue have you seen an exploit related to WebGL? And as far as I can tell, that was the issue MS needed fixed before going ahead with We

> Except for the CORS issue have you seen an exploit related to WebGL? And as far as I can tell, that was the issue MS needed fixed before going ahead with WebGL, but then again I haven't been following their actions in this area. On the other hand, another Microsoft employee seemed to agree with Mozilla and Google: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/20/webgl_/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/20/webgl_/ "And, frankly, if Microsoft has taken a formal position against WebGL, no one I know got the memo.” So maybe it was only the MS Security team being paranoid, as they are supposed to be? >As for the CORS issue, MS shipped CSS first and CSS had the same issue. Wouldn't that indicate that they have more reason to be wary of things like this? >You also realize that Mozilla started the WebGL spec, not Google and that Mozilla also released WebGL long before v1. Opera was also involved and MS was welcome to join but never bothered. WebGL is not proprietary. Never has been. So claiming Google is copying Microsoft by pushing proprietary standards is pretty disingenuous. Mozilla doesn't have clean hands in this either. It may not be proprietary, but releasing an implementation with known vulnerabilities? Enabling something widely used connected to the Internet without sufficient hardening is exactly what MS did with Win95/WinXP/ActiveX, and it created a decade of malware-infested Internet. They also got widely excoriated for that. I wouldn't blame them for being cautious going forward. > Want some MS evil evidence? Just Bing it So negative advertising is "evil"? I knew F/OSS folks thought MS's publicity against their religion was "evil", because, well it offends their personal beliefs... but so is negative advertising against your employer? Sorry, but Google engages in a lot of that itself, it's just that people in this echo chamber uncritically accept it as fact because it confirms their biases.