My message is not a red herring. I did not make any conclusions of my own for you to debate. I was trying to add context (note that I replied to fit2rule, I w

My message is not a red herring. I did not make any conclusions of my own for you to debate. I was trying to add context (note that I replied to fit2rule, I wasn't challenging you). I quoted the Guardian and gave the reason there is no public Snowden document on the Microsoft NSA issue. Therefore, we don't know the specifics of their collaboration/cooperation. I do not dispute what you said about delayed patches, but it is meaningless without that context. To be fair, there is not much daylight between: 'The root comment suggests that Microsoft arranges to provide NSA with vulnerabilities that they deliberately do not patch' and what the Guardian reported about Outlook. At least to me, but I'm not a security expert. Is it not considered a 'vulnerability' if Microsoft hands over the keys so to speak? Also on a side note, it is rude to call me out like you did. I don't have herrings up my sleeves. I don't care about internet points. I just wanted to contribute more information to the discussion.