--- Disclaimer: read the comments at the bottom of the article...

Microsoft invents a ‘fix’ for some bogus security bug and ‘Independent Security Evaluator’ heaps praise on Microsoft and talks up the ‘vulnerability’ in Mac OS X and GNU/Linux.

One of the areas where Linux really shines is security: you do not really need an antivirus if you are running Linux as an end user. In the Windows world however a good antivirus is almost a requirement as viruses and malwares are commonplace. I have personally seen Windows computers being infected less than an hour after being connected to the internet.

Microsoft security 'vulnerability scorecard' gives false impression of OS security, suggesting Windows is the most secure of all. Of course, start to look behind the pretty graphs and the ugly truth emerges that this is just more Microsoft FUD to try and derail the free software machine.

Latest OpenSSL FUD and Microsoft's Howard Schmidt's role informing the public about cyber-security risks

Jeffrey Jones, a researcher and the Security Strategy Director at Microsoft’s Trustworthy Computing group, recently posted a report [in which] Jones came to the conclusion that, contrary to popular belief, Internet Explorer has experienced fewer security vulnerabilities than Firefox over the same periods of time.

Led, somewhat ironically, by Microsoft Windows, operating system vendors and some other software vendors have been making their products more secure by default. They also have been providing tools and best-practice guidelines for application developers to improve security.

Tough week to the Web due to security issues (mostly Microsoft-imposed)

It's been at least a week since the last bout of Microsoft FUD hit the wires, so I guess it was time for a new wave. Today's FUD comes from an article Microsoft released on how its security compares with that of Linux. It should come as no surprise that Windows comes off as the Second Coming while Linux is left on the wrong side of Acheron.