Comments on: Critical iPhone SMS Vulnerability Revealed

By: Mac Security Improves with Snow Leopard | Technologizer

Mac Security Improves with Snow Leopard | Technologizer — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:25:48 +0000

[...] have made no bones about my opinion that Apple has done a lackluster job at security, but it deserves credit for moving in the right [...]

By: Apple Patches iPhone SMS Security Flaw | Think Plus

Apple Patches iPhone SMS Security Flaw | Think Plus — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 13:35:14 +0000

[...] attack using an iPhone with OS 2.2.1, but the vulnerability was not patched with the 3.0 update. Technologizer backs up the the pair’s claim, pointing out that the hole was not among the 46 security flaws [...]

By: ZenMaster

ZenMaster — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 16:14:56 +0000

The important is:
“Critical iPhone SMS Vulnerability Revealed”

Me and others, we dont care about sfmitch vs David Worthington secondary chok talk, to be honest.

K.I.S.S.

By: sfmitch

sfmitch — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 16:27:57 +0000

My point (which you still haven’t addressed) is that you link to several articles to support as evidence and the underlying articles don’t support you.

This blog post is needlessly sensationalistic and misleading.

Are those SD Times articles supposed to show how you have dropped the hammer on Microsoft, too. If so, once again, you’re liked articles don’t support your argument.

By: Paul Puri

Paul Puri — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 01:03:18 +0000

Aaah snaap Mitch. You got served! Technologizer style.
;>)

By: David Worthington

David Worthington — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:52:49 +0000

PS: Look beyond your nose.

http://www.sdtimes.com/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=32690
http://www.sdtimes.com/link/32627
http://www.sdtimes.com/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=33574
http://www.sdtimes.com/link/33224
http://technologizer.com/2009/02/12/microsoft-to-open-retail-stores-really/

By: David Worthington

David Worthington — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:48:35 +0000

Microsoft deserves credit for its SDL work. The entire industry acknowledges that. Apple is one of many companies that falls short on security. Note that I have quoted some of the most respected security experts in the industry in my “biased” articles.

Am I a Microsoft lover? Maybe you should look at what I’ve written at SD Times before you rush to judgment. I’ve also been critical of Microsoft on this site.

Not everyone is a fanboy (sorry, but it’s the truth). I own two Apple computers, and am iPhone. My old PC still runs Windows XP. I like all of those machines, but actually prefer my Macs!

By: sfmitch

sfmitch — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 14:11:24 +0000

@David Worthington

Me: Your post was misleading.

You: I know it was but I’m on a crusade.

I checked out your blog on that SD site and you are a Microsoft LOVER. You seem to write about any detail, no matter how small, as long as it is Microsoft related. I didn’t really think that was what Technologizer.com was going for. I really thought Harry wanted unbiased (or reasonably close) content. Live and learn.

By: David Worthington

David Worthington — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 04:35:14 +0000

@sfmitch ask apple what its security development lifecycle is and get back to me. hint: you won’t get an answer.

By: sfmitch

sfmitch — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 03:38:26 +0000

The tone of this article is very misleading.

The ‘Pantsing’ that Charlie Miller gave Apple was to discover a security flaw in the iPhone, report it to Apple with an agreement not to discuss the specifics of the vulnerability for a month. That sure doesn’t seem like a big deal, let alone a ‘Pantsing’.

The link you gave for Apple being ‘Sharply criticized’ is an article that doesn’t criticize Apple at all but rather, “… humbly present a few suggestions on how Apple can become a leader in consumer computing security over the long haul.”

Sorry, but the author (David Worthington) loses serious credibility by sensationalizing in this way.