For those who haven't heard, Symantec recently decided to fire a shot over Mozilla's bow regarding the security of their Firefox browser.

Read the ZDNews Story

After looking over Symantec's position, I've started to wonder if they're in Bill Gates' pocket.

Yes, Firefox has flaws. Show me a piece of software that doesn't! Have they had a fair number in the last 6 months? Absolutely! Is Symantec's analysis flawed? Very possibly.

I would be interested in comparing the first year of IE 6 vs the first year of Firefox 1.0. I suspect that there would be far more necessary patches, and far more of those would be critical, with IE. As well, I think it would be fair to compare the average amount of time for each browser's developer to release a patch once the vulnerability has been identified. However, Symantec didn't find/gather these stats, making their results questionable.

I guess some people figured that Firefox was a magic bullet for security. They're finding out now that there is no such thing as a truly SAFE browser, only ones that are less insecure. I still believe Firefox to be a safER and superior browser than IE.

Read Mozilla's Comeback on ZDNews